The NEXT LAST R600 Rumours & Speculation Thread [Archive] - Page 7

CarstenS

04-Apr-2007, 17:46

This would makes sense but your point was to basically have this by sacrificing the flag-ship based products. My point is: Why can't you have both?

I should explain myself a little further. I think the delay in R600 was at least in part due to the performance not exceeding G80 by a healthy enough margin. So they tried and stretched clocks as far as they'd go. Then it was discovered, that they'd get only so much R600 running at a high enough clockrate to beat G80 by more than 5-10 percent - plus needing a healthy surplus of power and cooling.

So, instead of taking the blame for another "NV30" (wrt heat, cooling, delay, not necessarily performance) and having to duck it out with expensive cooling, expensive memory and expensive PCBs against the established G80, they could've decided to cancel this product as it would do them no good and instead pretend to have planned a nice, quiet and inexpensive familiy-bbq all along.

If my speculation in the first paragraph was true, then that's at least what I would've done in their place - plus it fit's better with AMDs new profiling as a total platform provider instead of delivering single-high-end-Parts.

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 17:53

Or it's simply Occam's Razor at work, and what has been stated regarding R600 from AMD is the truth. ;)

Either way, we'll know in a couple of weeks.

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 18:03

Or it's simply Occam's Razor at work, and what has been stated regarding R600 from AMD is the truth.

Actually applying the razor would lead one to the conclusion that something went wrong and forced AMD's hand. The whole cancellation of editor's day as a move to a strategic delay and "family launch" requires a whole lot more imagination/gullibility :)

SirPauly

04-Apr-2007, 18:05

I should explain myself a little further. I think the delay in R600 was at least in part due to the performance not exceeding G80 by a healthy enough margin. So they tried and stretched clocks as far as they'd go. Then it was discovered, that they'd get only so much R600 running at a high enough clockrate to beat G80 by more than 5-10 percent - plus needing a healthy surplus of power and cooling.

So, instead of taking the blame for another "NV30" (wrt heat, cooling, delay, not necessarily performance) and having to duck it out with expensive cooling, expensive memory and expensive PCBs against the established G80, they could've decided to cancel this product as it would do them no good and instead pretend to have planned a nice, quiet and inexpensive familiy-bbq all along.

If my speculation in the first paragraph was true, then that's at least what I would've done in their place - plus it fit's better with AMDs new profiling as a total platform provider instead of delivering single-high-end-Parts.

Thank you for expanding and understand your point-of-view.

w0mbat

04-Apr-2007, 18:23

3DMark06

X6800@default, Intel 965er Mobo

8800GTX@630/2060 = 11391
R600@default = 12500 (+10%)

http://www.fx57.net/?p=550

jimmyjames123

04-Apr-2007, 18:24

I should explain myself a little further. I think the delay in R600 was at least in part due to the performance not exceeding G80 by a healthy enough margin. So they tried and stretched clocks as far as they'd go. Then it was discovered, that they'd get only so much R600 running at a high enough clockrate to beat G80 by more than 5-10 percent - plus needing a healthy surplus of power and cooling.

So, instead of taking the blame for another "NV30" (wrt heat, cooling, delay, not necessarily performance) and having to duck it out with expensive cooling, expensive memory and expensive PCBs against the established G80, they could've decided to cancel this product as it would do them no good and instead pretend to have planned a nice, quiet and inexpensive familiy-bbq all along.

I agree in general. Also, since AMD/ATI feels that their R6xx cards have a bigger advantage in DX10 vs DX9 in comparison to G8x, then the more they delay the closer they get to seeing DX10 games on the market. On top of that is the fact that a longer delay gives some extra time to work on drivers, and some extra time to improve yields and to build up more inventory of cards, then it's not far-fetched to see AMD going this route.

The biggest problem with a delay tactic is that it gives the competitor time to take good advantage of the situation.

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 18:39

Actually applying the razor would lead one to the conclusion that something went wrong and forced AMD's hand. The whole cancellation of editor's day as a move to a strategic delay and "family launch" requires a whole lot more imagination/gullibility :)

That's only because you're thinking like a historical GPU industry follower, not a CPU industry follower. ;)

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 18:41

We also need to consider the whole distribution ecosystem (read: AMD/ATI exclusive partners). If anyone would like to explain to me how not having a competitive high-end product for 6 months helped THEM, go for it. In fact there are rumors that Connect3D in on the verge of bankruptcy.

I think economic equating is fairly simple. People who were looking for a high-end card over last 6 months bought G80s. Unless R600 is amazing enough to convince them to upgrade from G80 to R600, each G80 sale is for all intends and purposes a loss of potential R600 sale.

Furthermore could anyone explain in detail the mechanism by which family lunch will improve sales of either high-end or midrange product as opposed to piecemeal rollout? I was not aware that "halo" effect fades so quickly.

Bob: "Wow, did you see those RV630 cards released today?"
Tom: "Not interested."
Bob: "Why not?"
Tom: "Isn't it obvious? The high-end part, R600 came out 2 months ago! Why would I want RV630-card?"
Bob: "You are right! The fact that R600 came out 2 months ago totally destroys the viability of RV630 as a competitive product!"
Tom: "If only R600 came out today. That would have made RV630, like, totally kickass extreme! To the MAXXXX!!!"
Bob: “Do the Dew!”

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 18:52

That's only because you're thinking like a historical GPU industry follower, not a CPU industry follower. ;)

I don't get it :oops: There isn't a history of family launches for CPU's either. It's quite common for a new architecture to be rolled out over a very long period of time.

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 18:58

Also, since AMD/ATI feels that their R6xx cards have a bigger advantage in DX10 vs DX9 in comparison to G8x, then the more they delay the closer they get to seeing DX10 games on the market.

If that's their tactic they should delay till september because that's when DX10 games will be available. Also, if those benches are accurate it's doing quite fine in DX9 as well.

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 18:59

That's only because you're thinking like a historical GPU industry follower, not a CPU industry follower. ;)

Forgive me for saying so, but does basic business sense change when assessing *any* product? You can't sell out of an empty wagon - that's pretty basic.

dnavas

04-Apr-2007, 19:10

Actually applying the razor would lead one to the conclusion that something went wrong and forced AMD's hand. The whole cancellation of editor's day as a move to a strategic delay and "family launch" requires a whole lot more imagination/gullibility :)

I've been trying to find a nice way to say this...
It would not be the first time that I've run into execs that believe that packaging trumps content -- Product Suites, "Solutions" vs. "Products", etc. are merely pitstops to believing "it doesn't matter what we ship, only that we make it look and sound good." I think I would prefer to believe that 'something went wrong'. The alternatives seem worse....

http://www.fx57.net/?p=550

I'm glad to see R600 getting better numbers than the 8800. Hopefully we'll get some interesting architectural twists to talk about! "12500" is an awfully round number though :)

jimmyjames123

04-Apr-2007, 19:21

If that's their tactic they should delay till september because that's when DX10 games will be available. Also, if those benches are accurate it's doing quite fine in DX9 as well.

I believe that AMD had to strike some sort of "balance" among the factors I listed above. If they launch in September, then that is almost a full year of no competition at the high end for NV, and it gives NV even more time to work up an awesome refresh. If they launch in March, then it's only about three or four months of no competition at the high end for NV, but then AMD is farther away from showing DX10 advantage, and also there is much room for improvement on driver side, on yields, on inventory, etc.

I found it interesting that when the G80 came out, NV stressed that one of the first and foremost rule of the new forward-looking DX10 architecture was to excel on DX9 games. As R600 is getting closer, AMD is only talking about DX10 advantage. Most likely NV realized that AMD would not be able to gain a significant performance advantage on DX9, and most likely AMD realized that as well and move on to promoting DX10 performance.

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 19:37

I don't get it :oops: There isn't a history of family launches for CPU's either. It's quite common for a new architecture to be rolled out over a very long period of time.

When AMD first launched the Athlon, Athlon 64, X2, did they have ~3-5 clock speed variants for each product at launch?

How about Intel wrt the Pentium IV and Core 2 Duo?

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 19:38

Forgive me for saying so, but does basic business sense change when assessing *any* product? You can't sell out of an empty wagon - that's pretty basic.

Right. But lo and behold, that's how ATI and Nvidia did business for a very long time. Particularly ATI in recent years.

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 19:49

When AMD first launched the Athlon, Athlon 64, X2, did they have ~3-5 clock speed variants for each product at launch?

How about Intel wrt the Pentium IV and Core 2 Duo?

I am sorry, but the analogy is faulty. Lunching Athlon 64 at several frequencies is the equivalent of lunching (card name) XTX PE, XTX, and XT at the same time - same chip, several price points- which is what original R600 lunch was supposed to be. The CPU equivalent of the family lunch currently planned would be AMD lunching new revisions of Operton, Athlon and Sempreton one the same day. Care to point out when that happed last time?

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 20:04

I am sorry, but the analogy is faulty. Lunching Athlon 64 at several frequencies is the equivalent of lunching (card name) XTX PE, XTX, and XT at the same time - same chip, several price points- which is what original R600 lunch was supposed to be. The CPU equivalent of the family lunch currently planned would be AMD lunching new revisions of Operton, Athlon and Sempreton one the same day. Care to point out when that happed last time?

AMD released the Opteron 100, 200, and 800 series at the same time. And there were significant differences other than just core clock between those lines iirc.

That's just off the top of my head.

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 20:15

Right. But lo and behold, that's how ATI and Nvidia did business for a very long time. Particularly ATI in recent years.

Selling out of an empty wagon means you haven't got anything to sell. Since technology has the shelf-life of a fresh fish, technology companies have to consistently produce new things to sell. The article that Trinibwoy linked to showed how 3dfx pretty much died on their own sword by not being able to do this. When technology companies have no new technology to sell...they are selling out of an empty wagon.

Nvidia had this same problem; for details, review how the FX 5800 went :lol: . Intel also did this; review the NetBurst architecture for details :lol: .

Sony might be an example to the opposite; the PS3 is new and different, but it isn't selling very well. Then again, it had delays, too. I don't know of too many folks that can argue against the idea that Sony is either delusional or grasping at straws when they claim awesome PS3 sales.

The point is, delays in what technology companies have in their wagons to sell cause issues because they aren't selling the most important thing that they have to sell: innovation. That is why I am saying ATI has an empty wagon at present. I love AMD processors, and their platforms; but right now they are also beginning to take a beating because they have no answer to Core 2.

To be honest though, I'm very likely to shut down my computers and move to the Sahara desert if I read on the [H]OCP forum one more post of "I have an AMD X2, am I CPU bound?" I actually saw one of "I have a 5000+ am I CPU bound?" Uh, no. Unless you plan on upgrading to an LN2 cooled Quad core, you are probably okay :lol:
The point of that statement is that somehow, Intel has managed to press home the idea that X2's just don't cut it...blah blah blah. I guess it was because they have something new, right?

EDIT: I'll also point out that my X2 PC consistently outperforms Core 2 systems that aren't overclocked and some that are. X2's are not 'CPU bound' they just don't overclock as well. Hopefully with Brisbane some of that changes.

And one last edit :D: I picked up a 1900GT for $129 dollars :shock: that was a "holy crap!" for me. I threw it in my Folding box today. I bought it because the fan died on my ancient 6600 non-gt..LOL, but also because for $129 that's pretty doggone cheap! ...And it folds :wink:

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 20:24

The CPU equivalent of the family lunch currently planned would be AMD lunching new revisions of Operton, Athlon and Sempron on the same day. Care to point out when that happed last time?

Agreed, it's already a stretch to think that the R600 situation has any relation to CPU launch practices but even if you get to that point there still is no evidence of CPU "family launches". The launch of 3-5 clockspeeds of the same chip is not a family launch since CPU families typically consist of much larger number of SKU's.

jimmy, I think Nvidia stressed DX9 performance because that's what IS important right now. It's not an opinion or some great insight - anybody can look at their current games library and tell you that :)

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 20:35

AMD released the Opteron 100, 200, and 800 series at the same time. And there were significant differences other than just core clock between those lines iirc.

That's just off the top of my head.

1) I thought there was availability delta between 1xx, 2xx and 8xx families.
2) From engineering point of view, what IS the difference between them?
3) Athlon FX/64 are based on the same architecture as Opteron, as was 64-bit version of Sampron. If there were perusing the "family launch" philosophy, should they not have lunched together? Instead, Athlon 64 was released 6 month after Opteron and Sampron 64-bit followed 2(!) years later... and I dare say there is much greater difference between RV610 and R600 there is between Athlon FX and Opterons, design-wise.

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 21:01

1) I thought there was availability delta between 1xx, 2xx and 8xx families.
2) From engineering point of view, what IS the difference between them?
3) Athlon FX/64 are based on the same architecture as Opteron, as was 64-bit version of Sampron. If there were perusing the "family launch" philosophy, should they not have lunched together? Instead, Athlon 64 was released 6 month after Opteron and Sampron 64-bit followed 2(!) years later... and I dare say there is much greater difference between RV610 and R600 there is between Athlon FX and Opterons, design-wise.

1) I believe those processors were released at the same time. Actually, let me amend that. The 800 series did come out later. Maybe a few weeks? But the 100 and 200 series came out at the same time.

2) http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_9240,00.html

Highlights:
100 = Single CPU per system, Socket 939, 0 coherent HT Links
200 = Dual CPU systems, Socket 940, 1 coherent HT Link
800 = Up to 8 CPU system, Socket 940, 3 coherent HT Links

I thought there were cache differences as well however. Guess I was wrong.

3) RV variants are basically 1/2 to 1/4 the R no? But functionally they're the same per quad. Oh, and they're typically on smaller processes than the Rs. Anyone want to chime in with other differences?

Natoma

04-Apr-2007, 21:02

Selling out of an empty wagon means you haven't got anything to sell. Since technology has the shelf-life of a fresh fish, technology companies have to consistently produce new things to sell. The article that Trinibwoy linked to showed how 3dfx pretty much died on their own sword by not being able to do this. When technology companies have no new technology to sell...they are selling out of an empty wagon.

Forgive me, but isn't this called a paper launch? Unless I'm just misunderstanding what you're getting at?

Sound_Card

04-Apr-2007, 21:09

http://rage3d.com/board/showpost.php?p=1334881043&postcount=1

cool little interview in there.

The reason we decided to delay the launch was that we wanted to have a complete DX10-enabled solutions top-to-bottom. A lot of people wrote that the reason it is delayed is because of a problem with the silicon, but there is no problem with the silicon. We are demonstrating it. We can ship it today. But if you think about it, looking at where the market is at, the volumes are going to be in the RV610 and RV630, so it makes sense for us to do a one time launch of the entire family of DX10 enabled products."

Also increasingly in particular with Vista, as we've seen with the competition. It doesn't matter if you're shipping the silicon if the drivers are not stable. There is nothing more frustrating than having bought a new graphics card and having your system crash repeatedly because the drivers are not ready. Although we today, even by Microsoft standards, have the best and most stable drivers in the entire industry. The few weeks will give us even more time to continue improving the drivers. Again, the decision lies in the fact that we will have a top to bottom DX10 offering with drivers that will have a very very high level of stability and the only difference is a few weeks. So it seems to make a lot of sense to do it that way.

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 21:20

1) I believe those processors were released at the same time. Actually, let me amend that. The 800 series did come out later. Maybe a few weeks? But the 100 and 200 series came out at the same time.

2) http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_9240,00.html

Highlights:
100 = Single CPU per system, Socket 939, 0 coherent HT Links
200 = Dual CPU systems, Socket 940, 1 coherent HT Link
800 = Up to 8 CPU system, Socket 940, 3 coherent HT Links

I thought there were cache differences as well however. Guess I was wrong.

3) RV variants are basically 1/2 to 1/4 the R no? But functionally they're the same per quad. Oh, and they're typically on smaller processes than the Rs. Anyone want to chime in with other differences?

So would it be fair to say in recent memory there have been no CPU "family" launches, at least if we were to define a "family" as "fairly different chips based on the same architecture aimed at different market segments"? Yes, Core 2 lunched at several frequencies, but so did NV25.

3dilettante

04-Apr-2007, 21:26

2) http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_9240,00.html

Highlights:
100 = Single CPU per system, Socket 939, 0 coherent HT Links
200 = Dual CPU systems, Socket 940, 1 coherent HT Link
800 = Up to 8 CPU system, Socket 940, 3 coherent HT Links

Are those highlights supposed to support that AMD's product lines were as different as RVx30 and RVx10 cores?

For K8, the HT links are set by fuses, I believe. The silicon was identical between the product lines. The use of the HT links to differentiate them was for market segmentation only.

I think the same can be said for S939 vs S940.

jimmyjames123

04-Apr-2007, 21:30

jimmy, I think Nvidia stressed DX9 performance because that's what IS important right now. It's not an opinion or some great insight - anybody can look at their current games library and tell you that :)

True, but note that when Geforce 6800 series architecture was unveiled, it was Shader Model 3.0 and HDR for future that was stressed, as opposed to SM 2.0 and what was currently out on the market. By looking at marketing angles, you can actually get a good sense of where the product will tend to be strongest in comparison to the competition, even before the product is released or unveiled in AMD's case :)

kresek

04-Apr-2007, 21:31

2) http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_9240,00.html

Highlights:
100 = Single CPU per system, Socket 939, 0 coherent HT Links
200 = Dual CPU systems, Socket 940, 1 coherent HT Link
800 = Up to 8 CPU system, Socket 940, 3 coherent HT Links
Actually, the "first wave" of 1xx Opteron chips used the Socket 940 infrastructure. Some time later AMD switched the 1xx's to Socket 939, making them affordable "workstation" CPUs.

As for the feature differences among the Opteron series - this all just boils down to the count of the ccHT links enabled. They do not seem to differ otherwise.

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 21:31

The reason we decided to delay the launch was that we wanted to have a complete DX10-enabled solutions top-to-bottom. A lot of people wrote that the reason it is delayed is because of a problem with the silicon, but there is no problem with the silicon. We are demonstrating it. We can ship it today. But if you think about it, looking at where the market is at, the volumes are going to be in the RV610 and RV630, so it makes sense for us to do a one time launch of the entire family of DX10 enabled products."

The whole: "We are going with a family, duh" never actually explains why launching a family Vs launching high-end SKU 7 weeks ahead is sooo great. What is going to happen, sales-wise, that otherwise would not have? (cue Bob and Tom). The DRAWBACKS of starving your partners for 2 extra months, canceling a launch event and letting the competition grow market share are clear. The tangible benefits are...?

Frank

04-Apr-2007, 21:43

The whole: "We are going with a family, duh" never actually explains why launching a family Vs launching high-end SKU 7 weeks ahead is sooo great. What is going to happen, sales-wise, that otherwise would not have? (cue Bob and Tom). The DRAWBACKS of starving your partners for 2 extra months, canceling a launch event and letting the competition grow market share are clear. The tangible benefits are...?
... that AMD wants to make an impact and show their shareholders that they did the right thing?

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 21:44

One last thing in regard to "CPUs launches are family affair, that's why R(v)6xx will be too":

K10-based Opterons will launch this summer. The rest of "K10 family" will not be released at the same time. Apparently some family ties are stronger than others.

Geeforcer

04-Apr-2007, 21:50

... that AMD wants to make an impact and show their shareholders that they did the right thing?

What "impact" and what "right thing"? Again, what EXACTLY will happen that will offset all the obvious drawbacks of the delay that would NOT have taken place had R600 been launched when it was supposed to?

Tom: "You know, I wasn't really interested in RV610... but OMG, did you feel the IMPACT?"
Bob: "Are you kidding? I am ordering 5 of those babies as I speak!"

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 22:06

Forgive me, but isn't this called a paper launch? Unless I'm just misunderstanding what you're getting at?

Actually, no...

It's a F'up on two fronts
We dominate the market ...

.....?

And we can dominate the future market

...?

I'm all for their folding, as illustrated by my purchase of a kick*ass flolding card...
Buit when I buy it at severely reduced margins I think..and sorry for saying this..won't last long

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 22:20

Point blank, hp shot, here is why user unfriendly neber win

I tried to utilize a teeth whitening kit, (to put it bluntle, get more attention :D) and it was ..less fruitful)

I utilitze my teeth whitening kit, because others also use it (volume) and there is a resullt , perceived or other wise

Make sense?

All the dental technicians believe in it

Or I can use the one that isn't so widespread.
We don't need anything significant to whiten teelh, just a plain but friendly concept.

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 22:26

Valzic

04-Apr-2007, 22:29

AMD is fundamentally a CPU company that bought ATI to augment their existing and future capabilities.

When Nvidia detailed how to best show the capabilities and speed of their flagship product, they said for best results use an Intel Core 2.

What will AMD use to demostrate their flagship R600?

Maybe some part of this delay is to let them be able to demostrate the R600 on a pre-production model of their next CPU models. That could show their strengths in GPU without comprimising their primary focus which is CPU. It seems to me that AMD has a much harder job now to announce and demostrate their ATI products than a Nvidia that can pick and choose the best of the current CPU speed demons on the market.

Although AMD could demostrate on an unannounced product and sites could not use the same for their reviews, sites would still use the best available CPU's to test the ATI vs Nvidia product . The key being AMD would not be the recommender.

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 22:32

Faud bless you for making a better point than I did

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 22:35

Good God. And that was most likely the worst attempt at making a point that this board has ever seen.

Hahahaha, man I'm glad you said it first. My first reaction to that post was wtf? Although it did make me want to buy some teeth whitening :lol:

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 22:39

True, but note that when Geforce 6800 series architecture was unveiled, it was Shader Model 3.0 and HDR for future that was stressed, as opposed to SM 2.0 and what was currently out on the market. By looking at marketing angles, you can actually get a good sense of where the product will tend to be strongest in comparison to the competition, even before the product is released or unveiled in AMD's case :)

Yeah, you gotta play to your strengths when you can. Although I didn't think that they were trying to paint it as a unique strength of their product line or implying that the impending competition was in some way weak at DX9. It was probably aimed at those people who were waiting for DX10 games before considering an upgrade to DX10 hardware.

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 22:55

Hahahaha, man I'm glad you said it first. My first reaction to that post was wtf? Although it did make me want to buy some teeth whitening :lol:

I readily admit that was not one of my better posts...LOL

Geo

04-Apr-2007, 22:56

. . .

/me does a doubletake on Trini's post count. . . .

Dude, did Digi give you the key to the Regulars clubhouse? l-b showed you the secret handshake?

Congrats. . . . :grin:

caffeinated

04-Apr-2007, 23:05

Hahahaha, man I'm glad you said it first. My first reaction to that post was wtf? Although it did make me want to buy some teeth whitening :lol:
God bless you for not pressing me further...LOL

I follow this because I am interested, not because I live and die by it

I am thrilled, though, that for $129 I have a card that folds.

trinibwoy

04-Apr-2007, 23:20

Dude, did Digi give you the key to the Regulars clubhouse? l-b showed you the secret handshake?

Congrats. . . . :grin:

Thanks man :grin:

Does this mean I get access to all of B3D's deep, dark secrets now? :lol:

Russell

04-Apr-2007, 23:48

If anyone would like to explain to me how not having a competitive high-end product for 6 months helped THEM, go for it. In fact there are rumors that Connect3D in on the verge of bankruptcy.

If Connect3D is indeed on the verge of bankruptcy, then it's for a much deeper-rooted reason than simply R600's absence. Remember, the money is in mid-range. Next-gen mid-ranges are not yet out and ATI's current midrange line is popular. Lacking a high-end product will not kill an OEM on their own. They would have to have been already dying.

I've been trying to find a nice way to say this...
It would not be the first time that I've run into execs that believe that packaging trumps content -- Product Suites, "Solutions" vs. "Products", etc. are merely pitstops to believing "it doesn't matter what we ship, only that we make it look and sound good."

Sounds a little like Intel back in the P4 days :)

Geeforcer

05-Apr-2007, 00:20

INKster

05-Apr-2007, 00:23

But, AFAIK K10 launch is not forthcoming for months.

K10 server/workstation or K10 desktop ?

Yes, i agree that they are probably waiting to spread R6xx + K10 review kits around, but i doubt they would use anything other than engineering samples of the desktop chips, or at least a variant of the "Barcelona" server core installed in a Quad SLI motherboard designed in-house (current ones are made by Nvidia, if you recall).

They could end up promoting three different products all at once, bringing the new AMD/ATI "platform" concept to a more visible position in the media.

Citrous

05-Apr-2007, 02:35

I dunno, but they clearly should have "gotten a Wagner."

_xxx_

05-Apr-2007, 07:23

Either way, we'll know in a couple of weeks.

You sure 'bout that?

_xxx_

05-Apr-2007, 07:43

Does this mean I get access to all of B3D's deep, dark secrets now? :lol:

Be careful what you wish for... ;)

Lux_

05-Apr-2007, 09:00

Not before summer, I'm afraid.
As they are waiting anyway, they may just throw in HL:EP2 or something.

_xxx_

05-Apr-2007, 09:16

Not before summer, I'm afraid.
As they are waiting anyway, they may just throw in HL:EP2 or something.

That would rather be DNF, I think :lol:

Seriously, sorry about the constant bitching, but the whole R600 thing has really became a farce. It's not even funny to make fun of it anymore, it's that old. Oh well.

neliz

05-Apr-2007, 09:20

Not before summer, I'm afraid.
As they are waiting anyway, they may just throw in HL:EP2 or something.

The bundled games have been announced allready ;)

AMD is trying to generate a Halo effect. set up a platform much like Centrino ViiV or VPro. it only takes you a new mainboard, processor and any Rx6 card to set up an AMD!Vile.. ehr.. AMD!Evil.. ehr.. no wait.. AMD!Live system and have HDCP, HDMI, HD resolution, AViVo and you know what.. we'll give you a discount, you pay $50 for a X2300XT with your new mainboard.

For all the naysayers.. sometimes it's better to wait a while than ask a girl if she goes third base when you first see her..

epicstruggle

05-Apr-2007, 11:19

It will certainly knock me back if they can pull that off. Launching a new chipset, cpu core, and r600 will definitely shock me. Im not sure it will happen, but stranger things have happened.

Oushi

05-Apr-2007, 11:22

i am bored from R600 rumors, I think it's time to lock this thread an never talk about it again.

trinibwoy

05-Apr-2007, 12:25

For all the naysayers.. sometimes it's better to wait a while than ask a girl if she goes third base when you first see her..

We haven't even gotten to flirt with R600, far less see it with its top off :razz:

caffeinated

05-Apr-2007, 13:55

We haven't even gotten to flirt with R600, far less see it with its top off :razz:

Personally I'd like to flirt a little ;)

w0mbat

05-Apr-2007, 15:08

Typo?
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/7732/x2900ez5.jpg
http://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&questionID=26661

Sobek

05-Apr-2007, 15:54

Could be there for those who actually have sample cards? :razz:

Arty

05-Apr-2007, 15:59

18 days to Techday?

Kaotik

05-Apr-2007, 20:21

Could be there for those who actually have sample cards? :razz:

But if the drivers supported X2900, shouldn't it be in the .inf's?

edit:
Possibly related, at realtek's site:
http://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=24&PFid=24&Level=4&Conn=3&DownTypeID=3&GetDown=false#High%20Definition%20Audio%20Codecs
"ATI HDMI Audio Device"
Most likely this is related to motherboards though, as at least I understood it so the audio on the R6xx's would be part of the gfx chip, not separate chip (so it couldn't really be realtek's, then?)

epicstruggle

05-Apr-2007, 20:34

18 days to Techday?
Hopefully it isn't changed again.

Anarchist4000

05-Apr-2007, 21:07

Those drivers are for a R5xx class card that has HDMI on it. Realtek has had them posted for a while. I wondered when I saw them a while back as well.

Razor1

05-Apr-2007, 21:46

http://www.bootdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=395&Itemid=59

r600 line price confirmation?

trinibwoy

05-Apr-2007, 22:05

So if it's true does it mean R600 is slow, or is AMD cutting off Nvidia at the knees? :smile:

Bubonic

05-Apr-2007, 22:07

So if it's true does it mean R600 is slow, or is AMD cutting off Nvidia at the knees? :smile:

Either way, I would like to see 128bit bus configurations on "lower" end cards to phase out. It's about time we see a 256bit bus on a mid level card.

ChronoReverse

05-Apr-2007, 22:22

Hrm, I couldn't care less whether the mid-range is 128bit, 64bit or 256bit as long as it's a $200 card that performs as well as the top-end card of the previous generation.

Geo

05-Apr-2007, 22:24

Either way, I would like to see 128bit bus configurations on "lower" end cards to phase out. It's about time we see a 256bit bus on a mid level card.

Other than Crazy Dave's Bargain Bin skus, or Jen-Hsun's Wacky World of Deals skus, are you seeing any evidence of that happening? I don't know that I'd call X1950 Pro a true midrange part. But even if we did, it was a much later release than the rest of the family so I'd be hesitant to draw "from now on" conclusions from it.

Bubonic

05-Apr-2007, 22:29

Other than Crazy Dave's Bargain Bin skus, or Jen-Hsun's Wacky World of Deals skus, are you seeing any evidence of that happening? I don't know that I'd call X1950 Pro a true midrange part. But even if we did, it was a much later release than the rest of the family so I'd be hesitant to draw "from now on" conclusions from it.

I'm not saying they are 256bit. I don't mean to come out like that. It would be one of those nice things to see though.

I'm going to keep a close eye on the RV630 XT for 200.00.

turtle

06-Apr-2007, 00:45

I'm going to keep a close eye on the RV630 XT for 200.00.

Yeah, me too...but also the part directly above that, which that price breakdown didn't help on. It's safe to assume there will be at least 3 SKUs from R600. That says one is $500, but is it the XTX (1GB gddr4) or the XT (512MB DDR3), and more importantly, where will the other SKUs fall, especially the part taking on the GTS 320MB. If that part is priced well after prices settle, breaking into that ~$250 midrange pricepoint, even if MSRP is higher, and performs well, then to me the 6800gt does indeed wear red and I shall be a happy camper. Hopefully the part filling that price point will come sooner, rather than later like the x1900gt/x1950pro...I really don't feel like waiting for RV670 hoping my dream will come true. If they can't do it though, I too will prolly take the RV630XT/8800gts route waiting for that card to emerge.

Russell

06-Apr-2007, 09:00

Yeah, me too...but also the part directly above that, which that price breakdown didn't help on. It's safe to assume there will be at least 3 SKUs from R600. That says one is $500, but is it the XTX (1GB gddr4) or the XT (512MB DDR3)

It'll be the R600XT. No way they can price something with 1GB of memory at that point.

Plus the rumors have been that R600XT will appear before XTX, so that kind of makes sense assuming these release prices aren't simply invented.

Twinkie

06-Apr-2007, 09:32

So they are releasing the X2900XT first? But if thats ATi's second best card, wouldnt that mean that it might not be as fast as the GTX?

People have waited for R600 for so long, will they be able to launch their second best card?

Unless this performs on par with the GTX or abit faster.

Ultra vs XTX
GTX vs XT
GTS vs XL

?

OT - The new 101.70 drivers gives a sneak preview of what is to come from the nVIDIA. The 8800 ultra. Guess R600 is coming closer to see the light of the day.

neliz

06-Apr-2007, 09:44

So they are releasing the X2900XT first? But if thats ATi's second best card, wouldnt that mean that it might not be as fast as the GTX?

there isn't such a big performance delta between the XT and XTX, if one is faster, the other will be as well..

Russell

06-Apr-2007, 09:57

So they are releasing the X2900XT first? But if thats ATi's second best card, wouldnt that mean that it might not be as fast as the GTX?

Such is the rumor. *Hands you some salt*

Robin B

06-Apr-2007, 15:13

A little more rumors from Fuad.:wink:

April in Tunis, Tunisia + Barcelona demo
ATI will hold its R600 tech days on the Monday 23rd till Tuesday 24rd of April in Tunis, Tunisia in African continent. This is the first major graphic launch to take place in Africa.

DAAMIT invited bunch of journalists about 185 if we remember correctly for this event and ATI will show some hot things such as RD790 chipsets and ten display R600 setup powered with Agena FX CPU (a desktop version of native quad core also known as Barcelona).

R600 will debut in external version as well and all this will be demonstrated on the 23rd and 24th of April in Tunisia.

The official launch will be in May probably at the middle of the month when ATI manages to get any R600 1024 MB cards out of production.

overclocked_enthusiasm

06-Apr-2007, 15:48

I am going to stick to my earlier assertion that R600 was delayed to show off Barcelona. Barcelona is vastly more important to AMD than the entire R600 family is at this point in time.

IF, and I do mean IF, AMD is able to show off the fastest CPU, GPU and chipset at the same time they will have a marketing coup on their hands. I have a hard time beleiving that AMD will show the x2900 XT if it is NOT faster than the 8800 GTX since it would tarnish the first showing of Barcelona.

Therefore, I think AMD is looking for a perceived triple win in Tunisia with CPU, GPU and chipset.

Ailuros

06-Apr-2007, 15:52

Honest question: how much of a "win" will Barcelona really be compared to its direct competitor?

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 15:59

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 15:59

Honest question: how much of a "win" will Barcelona really be compared to its direct competitor?

If you mean Barcelona as the 4-core server variant, it would most likely not be a win at all for gaming.
That chip's going to lag top of the line FXs in single-threaded performance, and there aren't many PC games that can be demoed to show the quad core to good effect.

If AMD wants to trot out an engineering sample of the dual-core variant that's not scheduled to launch for another six months, things might be different.

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 17:41

I am going to stick to my earlier assertion that R600 was delayed to show off Barcelona. Barcelona is vastly more important to AMD than the entire R600 family is at this point in time.

I still don't see how launching R600 as originally intended would have precluded then from showing off Barcelona in May. Besides, game perfromace is not what Opteron customers are looking for.

w0mbat

06-Apr-2007, 17:42

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 17:45

I still don't see how launching R600 as originally intended would have precluded then from showing off Barcelona in May. Besides, game perfromace is not what Opteron customers are looking for.

Now the difference between an Opteron and an Athlon FX is even thinner, since they will share the same socket infrastructure (LGA 1207), just like what happened with the early FX-51 desktop part.
The "civilized" desktop variants will use AM2, AM2+ and AM3 sockets.

So, using a "Barcelona"/"Agena" with R600 on a QuadFX board is not unreasonable.

Razor1

06-Apr-2007, 17:51

Now the difference between an Opteron and an Athlon FX is even thinner, since they will share the same socket infrastructure (LGA 1207), just like what happened with the early FX-51 desktop part.
The "civilized" desktop variants will use AM2, AM2+ and AM3 sockets.

So, using a "Barcelona"/"Agena" with R600 on a QuadFX board is not unreasonable.

yes but what does it really give them, reviewers are going to be using identical systems to benchmark both graphics cards regardless of barcelona. What is a positive is less marketing dollars when doing a joint launch is the only real reason I can see. And AMD is tight on cash.

Robin B

06-Apr-2007, 17:58

Wow, just wow.............

Kyle_Bennett HardOCP Editor-in-Chief

R600 pricing that Boot Daily has is wrong. The R600 is going to be ATI's 5800...
Reply With Quote

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 18:04

Wrong, my Opteron 146 is a good gamer :cool:

Wrong on what account? I didn't say Opteron does not perform in games - but gaming benchmarks are not going to sell servers.

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 18:08

Now the difference between an Opteron and an Athlon FX is even thinner, since they will share the same socket infrastructure (LGA 1207), just like what happened with the early FX-51 desktop part.
The "civilized" desktop variants will use AM2, AM2+ and AM3 sockets.

So, using a "Barcelona"/"Agena" with R600 on a QuadFX board is not unreasonable.

But there is no reason why they could not demonstrate R600+K10 had R600 been out for a while.

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 18:08

Wow, just wow.............

Say what ??

Robin B

06-Apr-2007, 18:10

Say what ??

Do you have any more info than Kyle ? :wink:
Sad news if it is the new 5800 .........

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 18:11

Do you have any more info than Kyle ? :wink:
Sad news if it is the new 5800 .........

No, but I'd like a link to that info, that's all.
It would be very disturbing if true...

edit
Nevermind, i've found it. :S

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 18:11

yes but what does it really give them, reviewers are going to be using identical systems to benchmark both graphics cards regardless of barcelona. What is a positive is less marketing dollars when doing a joint launch is the only real reason I can see. And AMD is tight on cash.

Except... this is NOT the offical Barcelona launch, is it?

Valzic

06-Apr-2007, 18:26

I am going to stick to my earlier assertion that R600 was delayed to show off Barcelona. Barcelona is vastly more important to AMD than the entire R600 family is at this point in time.

I agree. With the advent of AMD added to the equation, the priorities are different now.

Demonstrating a GPU product now can potentially showcase their prime area of focus, CPU sales and production. If they had to demostrate the R600 on their current product, it may highlight AMD's current CPU dilemma versus Intel even if its really about announcing a new GPU product. But a combo of Barcelona highlites both areas and as as Over-clocked said, the CPU is the key are for then at this time.

dnavas

06-Apr-2007, 18:30

Nevermind, i've found it. :S

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1176666&page=3

For those that care to have a link instead of guessing ;^/

-Dave

Kaotik

06-Apr-2007, 18:32

Somehow over the years I've grown to ignore everything Kyle says at HardOCP unless it's echoed by someone with a lot better reputation

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 18:35

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1176666&page=3

For those that care to have a link instead of guessing ;^/

-Dave

I didn't want to post a link to an outside forum out of respect for the intellectual capacity of B3D's forum members, but since you've provided it... :D

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 18:49

Now, the question is, what was Kyle's stance before 5800 became freely benchmarkable? (I would put a smiley here, but I don't know which one!)

Jawed

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 18:50

Yeah, I guess the whole "Kyle has it in for ATI" thing is pretty much confirmed now huh? That's a pretty bold and very stupid comment to make for someone in his position IMO. Unless Jen Hsun finally made use of Kyle's forum password :lol:

I'm still a bit confused by this Barcelona factor that people are pushing. How exactly is Barcelona going to sell more GPU's and how is R600 going to sell more CPU's? It would be just as fast in May had it launched months ago. Please don't say it's the "impact" of a combined launch :roll: :lol:

Geo

06-Apr-2007, 18:51

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1176666&page=3

For those that care to have a link instead of guessing ;^/

-Dave

Ghod. :roll:

Everyone who expects R600 to get ass-handed like the below, please raise your hand so we can laugh at you. I'm comparing "Application" to "Quality".

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video/geforce-fx/ut-3.gif

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 18:52

dnavas

06-Apr-2007, 18:54

I didn't want to post a link to an outside forum...

Hmm, well, I hope I haven't tripped over a forum no-no. :(

Somehow over the years I've grown to ignore everything Kyle says at HardOCP unless it's echoed by someone with a lot better reputation

That seems safer, frankly. I'm not sure what information he is privy to (prior to whatever meeting might happen on whatever continent it winds up happening on), but I'm not sure how the one (R600 == 5800) is related to the other (pricing). R600 is (apparently) hot and (definitely) late. The missing piece would apparently be performance, and nothing has surfaced that would indicate it was *bad*. (At least in comparison to the 8800GTX. Hmm)

I just don't see it either....

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 18:55

3DMk07, with yet more, heavier-duty, CPU tests integrated into the score for the win :roll:

Jawed

Uh yeah and how would launching earlier have precluded that exactly? If Barcelona is going to be used to make R600 look good then that's silly because R600 will be benched against the competition on the same CPU. If R600 is going to be used to make Barcelona look good what was the purpose of delaying R600? So from a performance perspective what exactly is the point? Your heavier-duty, CPU tests would matter for nought just like they matter for nought in the current 3dmark since the score is identical for all graphics cards tested.

I guess "impact" is what we're left with? Please show me how launching R600 earlier would change the performance standing of AMD hardware?

Robin B

06-Apr-2007, 18:59

Why do everyone compare it to the 8800GTX when it`s going to be 6 months later ? Guess we all know that NV is ready when the R600 is out ....

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 19:01

IQ is also a missing piece. R600 might have R5xx quality AF and 8xMSAA - both of which will lead to much merriment, regardless of performance.

Jawed

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 19:04

Ghod. :roll:

Everyone who expects R600 to get ass-handed like the below, please raise your hand so we can laugh at you. I'm comparing "Application" to "Quality".

You tell em geo. I wish Kyle would post that on his front page and put his reputation on the line. Or is it too late for that?

But what's with all the euphemisms for the almighty. I've seen Ghod and Ghu so far - are you really avoiding calling his name in vain by moving around some letters? :lol:

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 19:05

IQ is also a missing piece. R600 might have R5xx quality AF and 8xMSAA - both of which will lead to much merriment, regardless of performance.

Jawed

Maybe he was talking about power consumption, noise, etc, and not necessarily about performance.
Beats me.

But i admit [H]'s quality has certainly decreased lately.
The last article about Vista has details unworthy of an enthusiast tech website.

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 19:09

IQ is also a missing piece. R600 might have R5xx quality AF and 8xMSAA - both of which will lead to much merriment, regardless of performance.

Jawed

Of course but delays or Barcelona are completely irrelevant there. It's not like IQ improves over time and it certainly isn't helped along by a faster CPU. Now I really want to see AMD's angle on this whole thing. I'm not sure if R600's performance would change my opinion on the whole thing but I'd be more open to the strategic delay as a possibility if its gaming performance is below expectation.

INKster - can't really stamp something with the 5800 brand without referring to performance can you? I'm leaning towards Kyle being insane :smile:

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 19:14

Uh yeah and how would launching earlier have precluded that exactly? If Barcelona is going to be used to make R600 look good then that's silly because R600 will be benched against the competition on the same CPU. If R600 is going to be used to make Barcelona look good what was the purpose of delaying R600? So from a performance perspective what exactly is the point? Your heavier-duty, CPU tests would matter for nought just like they matter for nought in the current 3dmark since the score is identical for all graphics cards tested.

I guess "impact" is what we're left with? Please show me how launching R600 earlier would change the performance standing of AMD hardware?
Apart from anything else, can NVidia get 3DMk07 benching decently - maybe that's why their Vista drivers are so shit, they're concentrating on maximising 07 performance? Though the later AMD leaves R600, the more time they get :lol:

What if Barcelona, RD790 and R600 are joined by PCI-Express 2.0 and 07 is sensitive to this bandwidth? Regardless of that, optimising for 07 is easier if you own the entire system. NVidia's not going to have any Barcelonas for a while yet :wink:

Sadly, the headline 3DMk score is the only one that gets quoted in forums, on packaging, in adverts blah blah blah...

Jawed

Geo

06-Apr-2007, 19:16

But what's with all the euphemisms for the almighty. I've seen Ghod and Ghu so far - are you really avoiding calling his name in vain by moving around some letters? :lol:

Habits from a different subculture. . . :smile: (science fiction fans of a certain age)

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 19:18

Apart from anything else, can NVidia get 3DMk07 benching decently - maybe that's why their Vista drivers are so shit, they're concentrating on maximising 07 performance? Though the later AMD leaves R600, the more time they get :lol:

Heh, well I don't know what to say to that. I can't fathom a world where decisions like this revolve around 3dmark07. I don't think I have enough of an imagination to go there. But maybe that's why Kyle is mad? Because AMD's obsession with 3dmark is against everything he's trying to do with his "gameplay evaluation" review style? :grin:

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 19:18

I asked the question 3 pages ago and since it has not been answered yet I'll repeat it:

While the drawbacks of a delay are obvious, what are a tangible benefits of delaying R600? (and no, IMPACT! does count). What market dynamic will take place that will not only make up for losses associated with delay but also deliver additional profit to AMD VS the original launch schedule?

The "family launch" or "Barcelona demo" by themselves do not explain anything, since I have yet to see the breakdown of why Mid-March launch of R600 would negatively impact RVxxx launch in Mid-May OR render R600+K10 demo irrelevant.

dnavas

06-Apr-2007, 19:18

Why do everyone compare it to the 8800GTX when it`s going to be 6 months later ? Guess we all know that NV is ready when the R600 is out ....

Look at Geo's graphs above. The 9700 Pro was out roughly half a year before the 5800 Ultra as well (I see 9700 in Aug of 2002, while reviews of the Ultra popped up in late Jan 2003).

R600 might fail to "win" against an Ultra, or a GX2, but that doesn't make it a 5800....

I'm not sure why we're wasting the effort to justify Kyle's statement, but, if I was going to join in that (:)), maybe R600 went backwards on IQ (AF) to compete on benchmarks to where they thought G8 might land way back when.... *That* would be received pretty badly. It seems unlikely, though.

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 19:19

Of course but delays or Barcelona are completely irrelevant there. It's not like IQ improves over time and it certainly isn't helped along by a faster CPU.
No, but a big part of the 5800 picture was the atrocious IQ - some of which arose because IQ was lowered solely for benchmarking. It won't be as big a difference this time round, but it's just another of the nail's in that coffin that might get a second moment of glory.

Jawed

Kaotik

06-Apr-2007, 19:20

Why do everyone compare it to the 8800GTX when it`s going to be 6 months later ? Guess we all know that NV is ready when the R600 is out ....

Yes we do, it's been in the drivers for a while I think? By the name "8800 Ultra" which means 8800GTX with higher clocks. There's no indications of "G81" like chip as far as I know.

Razor1

06-Apr-2007, 19:20

Anarchist4000

06-Apr-2007, 19:32

Maybe the R600==5800 comparison was in reference to the work that went into the drivers. The old comparison would be ATI didn't spend much time optimizing drivers while Nvidia(to make up performance) spent a significant amount of time. The current would be the opposite where ATI spent a lot of time on drivers(making them stable for all OS's) while Nvidia didn't spent much time(completely dropping the ball on driver development). That's one messed up comparison but worth a shot. lol

As for the R600 and Barcelona AMD stated that for a desktop there isn't much to show because not many apps would take advantage of 4 cores over 2. How many times has anyone actually seen 100% CPU usage on a dual core outside of compressing something? Graphics are the one area where you might be able to take advantage of it and really demonstrate the power of the chip. I'm still curious if Barcelona will act like 4 cores or possibly revert to one giant core under certain cases. If you start processing vectors it would seem you could stretch the operations out over all 4 cores and run in parallel. That could have a rather significant impact for games if it was set up correctly.

Any chance they could be planning on launching R600 and Barcelona with a Crysis demo? If DX10 is beneficial to R600 it would make sense that they would attempt to showcase that advantage.

BRiT

06-Apr-2007, 19:37

While the drawbacks of a delay are obvious, what are a tangible benefits of delaying R600? (and no, IMPACT! does count). What market dynamic will take place that will not only make up for losses associated with delay but also deliver additional profit to AMD VS the original launch schedule?

It gives them more time to clear the channel of the older X1xxx series parts?

Other than that, I see nothing. We will never know the real reason the launch was delayed. It will always be spun by PRsters.

On another note, maybe the R600 == Nv5800 means in a month or so they will release the R650 which will greatly improve it's performance even more so.

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 19:37

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 19:38

I'm still curious if Barcelona will act like 4 cores or possibly revert to one giant core under certain cases. If you start processing vectors it would seem you could stretch the operations out over all 4 cores and run in parallel. That could have a rather significant impact for games if it was set up correctly.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. Everything shown so far shows the cores are completely separate.
There's no good way to make four separate cores come together and work off the same thread. There's too much communication and too many sources of error to make it possible to do very quickly.

Razor1

06-Apr-2007, 19:40

Stepping back a bit, who is going to be most impacted by whatever AMD shows behind closed in the next few weeks? The independent reviewers will be using their own CPU's supposedly. So who would AMD be targeting with this showcase? OEM's? Wall Street?

not wall street, stock prices would go up anyways if thier products are good since they will help top and bottom lines, and stock price I don't think is a major concern (on a scale) over other problems.

Possibly OEM's, but high end products are only a fraction of OEM sales, so doesn't make much sense unless AMD is going to be doing something spectacular that no other company can touch is really the only justification that would be presumable and we know how many times that happens in a saturated market.

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 19:45

On another note, maybe the R600 == Nv5800 means in a month or so they will release the R650 which will greatly improve it's performance even more so.

And risk an Osborne Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_Effect) ? Not a chance...

overclocked_enthusiasm

06-Apr-2007, 19:46

I'm still a bit confused by this Barcelona factor that people are pushing. How exactly is Barcelona going to sell more GPU's and how is R600 going to sell more CPU's? It would be just as fast in May had it launched months ago. Please don't say it's the "impact" of a combined launch :roll: :lol:

I guess this is what I am saying. AMD has an image problem right now on 2 fronts.

1. Their CPUs are considered inferior to Intel's
2. Their GPUs are considered inferior to Nvidia's

In order to benchmark the R600 against the 8800 GTX they would have almost had to use a Core2Duo in some cases as that is the top CPU used to benchmark right now and that is where Nvida has their highest scores I assume. That would have made AMD look stupid and confirmed #1 above that Intel is fastest/better and only solved #2 IF iR600 really did beat G80.

Now by waiting, they can kill 2 birds with one stone and try to regain that lost mindshare via having the best/fastest GPU and CPU. No the quadcore Barcelona isn't going to be a desktop gaming part in general but they will argue that it shows "what is to come". AMD has an image problem and are considered a laggard right now. This is 1/2 PR and 1/2 good business. They certainly sacrificed some R600 family sales (assuming they were ready in volume) by delaying but they have bigger fish to fry than GPU sales right now.

It is no coincidence IMHO that Barcelona is being shown for the first time with R600 and RD790. AMD is selling their platform approach with arguably the best tech in all 3 categories IF they can pull it off. This positive PR buzz may jumpstart their lagging sales and certainly help to repair the "AMD is falling behind Intel" mindset that is taking root. Not to mention that this platform wide approach now makes alot more sense in May then it did in February considering the slow upgrade path of Vista.

nutball

06-Apr-2007, 19:57

I asked the question 3 pages ago and since it has not been answered yet I'll repeat it:

While the drawbacks of a delay are obvious, what are a tangible benefits of delaying R600? (and no, IMPACT! does count).

Well there's also the question of the tangible benefit of a 512-bit memory bus, which has gone unanswered for three months. Maybe the two are related, who knows. 5800 had a wrong-sized memory bus I believe, maybe that's what it's all about. :???: It was a totally inappropriate solution compared to what the competition had on the market at the time, because the competition had wrong-footed them.

trinibwoy

06-Apr-2007, 20:00

In order to benchmark the R600 against the 8800 GTX they would have almost had to use a Core2Duo in some cases as that is the top CPU used to benchmark right now and that is where Nvida has their highest scores I assume. That would have made AMD look stupid and confirmed #1 above that Intel is fastest/better and only solved #2 IF iR600 really did beat G80.

I see what you're trying to say but I differ on a couple points. R600 beating G80 on Core 2 Duo would not have diminished AMD's CPU reputation - everybody already knows that they are behind - there's nothing futher to prove. Regarding the last sentence in the above quote I believe you have to assume R600 does beat G80 for your point to stick.

This is 1/2 PR and 1/2 good business.

Agreed on the PR, not on the good business. If you are lagging the competition and are trying to catch up you would want to get your stars out on the field as soon as possible - you wouldn't wait till everything is "perfect". The competition isn't standing still while you wait for all your stars to line up.

It would be very nice for AMD if they can demonstrate that they are firing on all cylinders in CPU, GPU and chipset. But I don't believe it will have the impact on sales that some believe (compared to an early R600 launch). Maybe they are just taking time to regroup after the merger (that may be what you're saying). When will desktop variants of Barcelona come to market anyway?

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 20:02

Now by waiting, they can kill 2 birds with one stone and try to regain that lost mindshare via having the best/fastest GPU and CPU. No the quadcore Barcelona isn't going to be a desktop gaming part in general but they will argue that it shows "what is to come". AMD has an image problem and are considered a laggard right now. This is 1/2 PR and 1/2 good business. They certainly sacrificed some R600 family sales (assuming they were ready in volume) by delaying but they have bigger fish to fry than GPU sales right now.

Barcelona would be a bad choice to show it isn't a laggard for the R600's target market.
A quad core pre-release Barcelona at a maximum of 2.4 GHz is not likely to match a 3 GHz dual core A64 at any game or gaming benchmark due to its reduced single-threaded performance.

If AMD tries to use Barcelona+R600 as a way to appeal to gamers, it is a very poor choice.

R600 will be CPU-limited, and Barcelona will get negative press in a market it is completely unsuited for.

It is no coincidence IMHO that Barcelona is being shown for the first time with R600 and RD790.

Actually, it could be argued it is. If R600 wasn't so late, it would have been out 6 months prior to Barcelona's earliest production silicon (rumor has it it is close to this point). Barcelona is likely still months out from launch for servers. It is a quarter or more beyond that for a desktop variant.

The family launch is a fun coincidence they're trying to spin like they've planned it all along.

Geeforcer

06-Apr-2007, 20:13

I guess this is what I am saying. AMD has an image problem right now on 2 fronts.

1. Their CPUs are considered inferior to Intel's
2. Their GPUs are considered inferior to Nvidia's

In order to benchmark the R600 against the 8800 GTX they would have almost had to use a Core2Duo in some cases as that is the top CPU used to benchmark right now and that is where Nvida has their highest scores I assume. That would have made AMD look stupid and confirmed #1 above that Intel is fastest/better and only solved #2 IF iR600 really did beat G80.

Now by waiting, they can kill 2 birds with one stone and try to regain that lost mindshare via having the best/fastest GPU and CPU. No the quadcore Barcelona isn't going to be a desktop gaming part in general but they will argue that it shows "what is to come". AMD has an image problem and are considered a laggard right now. This is 1/2 PR and 1/2 good business. They certainly sacrificed some R600 family sales (assuming they were ready in volume) by delaying but they have bigger fish to fry than GPU sales right now.

It is no coincidence IMHO that Barcelona is being shown for the first time with R600 and RD790. AMD is selling their platform approach with arguably the best tech in all 3 categories IF they can pull it off. This positive PR buzz may jumpstart their lagging sales and certainly help to repair the "AMD is falling behind Intel" mindset that is taking root. Not to mention that this platform wide approach now makes alot more sense in May then it did in February considering the slow upgrade path of Vista.

IMO there are several problems with this argument. I fully agree that AMD is not thrilled by having to match its GPUs with Core 2s for the best performance. But, the launch event itself is not going to sell GPUs - the reviews will and unless AMD is shipping a K10 system to every reviewer this is moot point. Furthermore, considering IQ setting high-end cards are benchmarked at nowadays, K10 Vs Core 2 Vs Athlon X2 will have little to none impact on the results, at least in single GPU configuration.

Another point that need to be emphasized is that K10 is NOT being lunched at this time - we are still several months away from that release. As such, this is not going to jump-start their lagging CPU sales for the simple reason that there are no CPUs to buy. So is the argument now that people are more likely to buy R600 because it was demoed with K10s at the launch event then they would have been had it already been released and this will offset lost sales due to delay? I mean, I can't dismiss the possibly that there are people who would have read X2900 reviews on March 20th and would not have wanted one, but after hearing about the launch event and reading reviews on May 20th will all of the suddenly want one... but I have hard time believed that there are enough of them for AMD to go through the embarrassment of canceled launch.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the consumer K10 is not due till Fall. Try as I might I have trouble envisioning how delaying R600 NOW will make people more likely to buy CPUs THEN.

overclocked_enthusiasm

06-Apr-2007, 20:29

I didn't realize the single threaded performance disadvantage of Barcelona in benchmarking today's games. You guys are infinitely smarter than I on those topics.

In that case, I am going to resort back to my original position that they botched the launch so bad that it ran into the other cards so they decided to do a whole family launch instead...an attempt to make lemonaid out of lemons.

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 20:33

While I can see why some may find it appealing to have a "family" launch, think of the nightmare it will cause for reviewers. All of a sudden they would have to work up articles on so many different brand new products all at once. Since time is limited, that would mean that the reviewers may not be able to go into as much depth on each specific hardware piece as they may have wanted to.

If R600 hardware was ready to ship last month, and quantities were considered good and drivers were considered good, then it would make little sense not to launch it. Clearly the R600 was deficient in one or more of these areas as of last month. Note that AMD is stressing that the R600 hardware is good to go and could have been shipped already, but they don't mention anything about having very good quanties or having optimal drivers to back that up.

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 20:35

Apart from anything else, can NVidia get 3DMk07 benching decently - maybe that's why their Vista drivers are so shit, they're concentrating on maximising 07 performance?

I'm just curious, have you actually used an NV 8800 card under Vista?

IbaneZ

06-Apr-2007, 20:59

A 5800 is:

1. Late
2. Loud
3. A lousy performer vs the competition.

So far it's only numero uno right? Two more to go. :)

What's up with Kyle anyway? Did DAAMIT "forget" to invite him to tech day? :oops:

leoneazzurro

06-Apr-2007, 21:25

Barcelona would be a bad choice to show it isn't a laggard for the R600's target market.
A quad core pre-release Barcelona at a maximum of 2.4 GHz is not likely to match a 3 GHz dual core A64 at any game or gaming benchmark due to its reduced single-threaded performance.

If AMD tries to use Barcelona+R600 as a way to appeal to gamers, it is a very poor choice.

R600 will be CPU-limited, and Barcelona will get negative press in a market it is completely unsuited for.

Considering that a Core 2 Duo at 2.4 GHZ (E6600) beats or it's almost equal to a 3 GHz Athlon 64 in almost every gaming benchmark and that AMD claims much faster FP performance of Barcelona (and a little higher integer performance, too) over Core 2 architecture on a clock-to clock comparison, I would not understimate the possibility. Barcelona, moreover, is rumored to come out at 2.7 GHz, too (and IMHO it could achieve such speed in this stage with a little "help" in the cooling department)

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 21:50

Considering that a Core 2 Duo at 2.4 GHZ (E6600) beats or it's almost equal to a 3 GHz Athlon 64 in almost every gaming benchmark and that AMD claims much faster FP performance of Barcelona (and a little higher integer performance, too) over Core 2 architecture on a clock-to clock comparison, I would not understimate the possibility.

AMD's claims of much higher FP performance over Core2 are debatable. In peak numbers, both architectures likely trade blows, with some scenarios favoring one chip over the other.

The few relatively hard numbers given by AMD are for SpecFP rate, which is a measure of scalability. This is essentially pointless for the desktop.

Claims of superior per-clock integer performance over Core2 have not been substantiated. It has not been indicated that the per-clock gain is enough to offset a 600 MHz clock deficit.

What is known is that there will continue to be a sizeable clock advantage for Intel until at least 3Q 2007. At that point, it will be reduced to merely a clock advantage, assuming Intel doesn't just up the clock speed grades it is likely holding back.

Barcelona, moreover, is rumored to come out at 2.7 GHz, too (and IMHO it could achieve such speed in this stage with a little "help" in the cooling department)

The only thing I've seen discussed is a dual-core variant, Kuma, that is set to release Q3 2007, a quarter after Barcelona.

neliz

06-Apr-2007, 22:10

Don't worry guys I checked Kyle's 5800Ultra preview and then distiled his conclusions and thus have the first X2900XTX preview:

As we’ve seen, the Radeon 2900XTX is no slouch in the 3D accelerator world, however it is not the "8800-killer" many have expected. It is, at best, mildly faster in most games, and the same or slightly worse in a few. Had it arrived when most of us thought it should, there is no doubt it would be much better received.

However, its best performance was in 3dmark2007, a synthetic benchmark, and its worst in ut2008, an actual game compared to the 8800GTX. This is strangely reminiscent of the Radeon 8500 release, where the Radeon won in 3dmark, but lost in games to the GeForce 3. This anomaly, plus the strange texture problems that popped up, all point to immature drivers.

The Bottom Line: The Radeon 2900XTX is a very hot and noisy beast that may give you a bit of an edge over the current king of the hill, the nVidia 8800GTX in some applications. If you are an ATI fanboy, this of course has your name all over it. At the current US$599.00 price point, the Radeon simply does not seem worth it to us. If AMD can work some driver magic and pull an extra 20% increase in frame rate out of the bag like we have seen in the past, they had best start pulling. Either that or pull out the R650 chipset, and quick.

This year will be interesting as both ATI and NVIDIA know it is all about having the best VidCard on the market when Crysis hits.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIxLDYsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

leoneazzurro

06-Apr-2007, 22:26

AMD's claims of much higher FP performance over Core2 are debatable. In peak numbers, both architectures likely trade blows, with some scenarios favoring one chip over the other.

Probably, but on the paper there are advantages in Barcelona's FP implementation over Core 2's one. AMD claim it's maybe tto bold (40%) but it's reasonable to think that there will be probably an advantage. How much this advantage is, is indeed debatable.

Claims of superior per-clock integer performance over Core2 have not been substantiated. It has not been indicated that the per-clock gain is enough to offset a 600 MHz clock deficit.

I mean integer performance over Core 2 duo, not A64. Note that Core 2 E6600 is almost as fast as A64 6000+, with a 600 MHz disadvantage. Barcelona will be not only a "beefed up" A64.

The only thing I've seen discussed is a dual-core variant, Kuma, that is set to release Q3 2007, a quarter after Barcelona.

I mean an overclocked CPU, anyway a 2.7 GHz Barcelona is on the roadmap, not for June, this is sure. But what I want to point out is that Barcelona will be probably at least on par of Core 2 architecture, which is way faster in games than K8 architecture. This could lead to suppose that even a 2.4GHz (or more if oveclocked) Barcelona could be indeed faster in games than a 3 GHz A64.

With this, I don't want to say that R600 is late because Barcelona, but that because it was anyway late, and being the Barcelona launch not too far away, they could have indeed thought to showcase R600 in the tech day with Barcelona (which is already working as seen in the "teraflop" demonstration).

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 22:27

I'm just curious, have you actually used an NV 8800 card under Vista?
Don't be silly.

Jawed

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 22:38

I mean integer performance over Core 2 duo, not A64. Note that Core 2 E6600 is almost as fast as A64 6000+, with a 600 MHz disadvantage. Barcelona will be not only a "beefed up" A64.

Just because Barcelona will be improved over A64 doesn't mean it will beat Core 2.
So far, details on Barcelona show it is not as aggressive as Core 2 at extracting ILP. Its prefetchers are less aggressive, it's memory reordering is less aggressive, and its clock will be significantly less.

The cache hierarchy is also more favorable for desktop loads with Core 2.

I mean an overclocked CPU, anyway a 2.7 GHz Barcelona is on the roadmap, not for June, this is sure. But what I want to point out is that Barcelona will be probably at least on par of Core 2 architecture, which is way faster in games than K8 architecture. This could lead to suppose that even a 2.4GHz (or more if oveclocked) Barcelona could be indeed faster in games than a 3 GHz A64.

Little of what is currently disclosed indicates this to be the case for desktop workloads.

Barcelona's biggest advantage is its overall platform, something that doesn't matter with the limited threading of desktop games and apps.

Barcelona is not expected to exceed Core 2's per-core and per-clock performance by an amount that exceeds its clock deficit, this is more important than the number of cores for the desktop.

If AMD intends to overclock a Barcelona chip, it may as well disable half the cores and vapochill the thing. Its results would be as relevant or helpful as using a Core 2 chip.

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 22:50

Don't be silly.

Jawed

I take it that you don't even have an 8800 card then? So much for practical first-hand experience to support a theory :D

What did you mean when you said "their Vista drivers are so shit"? What does that mean?

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 23:06

I take it that you don't even have an 8800 card then? So much for practical first-hand experience to support a theory :D
It's not a theory. Does NVidia pay you to post on forums, money or free hardware, anything like that?

What did you mean when you said "their Vista drivers are so shit"? What does that mean?
It means they're shit. I'm sure there'll be a press release announcing that they're all working dandy at some point and there's no need for the Vista Problems page:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/vistaqualityassurance.html

Jawed

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 23:08

It's not a theory. Does NVidia pay you to post on forums, money or free hardware, anything like that?

No they don't. Does AMD/ATI pay you to post on forums, money or free hardware?

Mod Edit: Personal remark removed.

leoneazzurro

06-Apr-2007, 23:14

Just because Barcelona will be improved over A64 doesn't mean it will beat Core 2.
So far, details on Barcelona show it is not as aggressive as Core 2 at extracting ILP. Its prefetchers are less aggressive, it's memory reordering is less aggressive, and its clock will be significantly less.

It has several advantages in fetching instructions with respect to core 2 (32 bits against 16), has OOO loads and some OOO store, doubles the bandwidth between L1 and L2 with respect to A64, can execute 2 128 bit loads per cycle, etc. etc. . There are no real details on cache prefetching, which was said to be "better" than A64's
So it's probably going to be significantly better that A64 on a clock per clock basis, and if it is still only on par with Core2, it will be anyway better than any present AMD CPU.

Barcelona's biggest advantage is its overall platform, something that doesn't matter with the limited threading of desktop games and apps.

This is pointless. Barcelona is the first incarnation of an architecture that should cover any application from desktop (and gaming) to server and workstation market. AMD does not want to make only server chips. If it is not at least on par or anyway very close with Intel's offering, then we can say "bye bye AMD". Reducing prices because a performance disadvantage means making no money.

Barcelona is not expected to exceed Core 2's per-core and per-clock performance by an amount that exceeds its clock deficit, this is more important than the number of cores for the desktop.

We really don't know at the moment what Barcelona is capable to do, I anyway agree that probably Intel will keep the absolute performance crown for a while, because process and clock advantages.

If AMD intends to overclock a Barcelona chip, it may as well disable half the cores and vapochill the thing. Its results would be as relevant or helpful as using a Core 2 chip.

Yes, but hey, it's marketing! Intel refused for years to make a confrontation between Opterons and Xeons. And anyway it could be a dual core prototype with higher clocks than Barcelona.

Jawed

06-Apr-2007, 23:20

Does AMD/ATI pay you to post on forums, money or free hardware?
No :smile:

Jawed

Arun

06-Apr-2007, 23:22

Geo

06-Apr-2007, 23:26

I take it that you don't even have an 8800 card then? So much for practical first-hand experience to support a theory :D

That standard would cause this thread to go up in smoke right quick! :lol: (said the 8800GTX/Vista owner)

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 23:29

Now THAT is a great answer, Arun, and exactly what I was interested in hearing about! :)

I could understand if NV is holding back on higher performing drivers until R600 comes out. However, there is no reason why they should hold back on higher stability drivers one would think. They must have been challenged in a big way to not only create super fast and stable drivers for brand new G8x cards, but also for new OS in addition to supporting older cards.

With respect to R6xx cards, it seems that at least publically AMD is very happy with the driver development so far. However, I'm sure that they anticipate many of the same issues. The delay in launch is a good thing for their drivers, even if it keeps the driver team working overtime for a couple months.

I like the fact that consumers have a much better idea of when to receive driver updates [monthly] from AMD/ATI, as opposed to NV's strategy of randomly providing updates.

It will be interesting to see how the drivers compare between AMD and NV around summer time, when hopefully many of the stability issues will be worked out.

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 23:29

It has several advantages in fetching instructions with respect to core 2 (32 bits against 16), has OOO loads and some OOO store, doubes the bandwidth between L1 and L2 with respect to A64, can execute 2 128 bit loads per cycle, etc. etc. . There are no real details on cache prefetching, which was said to be "better" tah A64's
So it's probably going to be significantly better that A64 on a clock per clock basis, and if it is still only on par with Core2, it will be anyway better than any present AMD CPU.

Barcelona's L2 caches are smaller than A64's, it will clock 600 MHz less, and it will be in early production silicon at best.
Most of its cores will not be utilized.
Core 2 was a vast improvement over Netburst. K8 was a superior core to Netburst per-clock.
The amount of improvement will not be as much for Barcelona as Core 2 had over Netburst.

For the sake of demonstrating a superior gaming platform, it is likely closer to a tie to the current top-end gaming FXs.

This is pointless. Barcelona is the first incarnation of an architecture that should cover any application from desktop (and gaming) to server and workstation market. AMD does not want to make only server chips. If it is not at least on par or anyway very close with Intel's offering, then we can say "bye bye AMD". Reducing prices because a performance disadvantage means making no money.

Its desktop equivalents are a quarter past Barcelona's release, and that release is still months after the likely launch of R600.

Barcelona is a quad-core server processor. The idea of using it to demonstrate a superior platform for gaming and for R600 is what is being debated.

I am only discussing Barcelona because that name only applies to that particular chip.

Yes, but hey, it's marketing! Intel refused for years to make a confrontation between Opterons and Xeons. And anyway it could be a dual core prototype with higher clocks than Barcelona.

I've already brought up that possibility, which is a better one than saying Barcelona is a superior gaming chip.

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 23:32

I am only discussing Barcelona because that name only applies to that particular chip.

Hence "Agena FX". :wink:

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 23:37

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 23:39

Agena isn't expected until a release with Kuma in Q3.

It still clocks lower than Kuma (a better choice, since if they have Agena around, it should be around), but would do better than a Barcelona at 2.4 GHz.

Maybe i'm confusing codenames (probably :D), but isn't there a clear distinction between "Agena", "Agena FX" and "Kuma" ?

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 23:44

Maybe i'm confusing codenames (probably :D), but isn't there a clear distinction between "Agena", "Agena FX" and "Kuma" ?

From what I've seen, Agena and AgenaFX differ only on the socket they use, and the non-FX version will have more speed grades below the top speed.

Kuma is the dual-core variant of Barcelona, and it has the higher clocks because of the reduced number of cores.

INKster

06-Apr-2007, 23:55

From what I've seen, Agena and AgenaFX differ only on the socket they use, and the non-FX version will have more speed grades below the top speed.

Kuma is the dual-core variant of Barcelona, and it has the higher clocks because of the reduced number of cores.

But currently there are three FX speed grades (FX 70; FX 72; FX 74), so why are they going back to a single "halo" CPU again ?

Makes little sense to me, certainly even less when the only difference between an "Agena" and an "Agena FX" will likely be a step up in the speed bin and an unlocked multiplier (or so we hope), and all of them will have to be used with niche motherboards (LGA 1207 will take care of carving it, price-wise).

The last time AMD used a server/workstation socket exclusively for a server/workstation CPU and/or a top desktop part (socket 940) clearly didn't work, or else they wouldn't have devised FX processors for the socket 939. They would've just kept them in s940.

leoneazzurro

06-Apr-2007, 23:58

Barcelona's L2 caches are smaller than A64's, it will clock 600 MHz less, and it will be in early production silicon at best.
Most of its cores will not be utilized.
Core 2 was a vast improvement over Netburst. K8 was a superior core to Netburst per-clock.
The amount of improvement will not be as much for Barcelona as Core 2 had over Netburst.

1Mbyte vs 512Kbyte of cache leads to an 3-5% improvement in games on A64 at the same clock. Barcelona caches will have more bandwidth and there will be the other improvements. Core 2 was a major improvement versus Core architecture (Yonah) but Yonah was on the same league of A64 on a performance per clock basis. If we see the same Core-Core2 jump between A64 and Barcelona...

For the sake of demonstrating a superior gaming platform, it is likely closer to a tie to the current top-end gaming FXs.

There is a misunderstanding here: Barcelona will of course not be the "AMD gaming superior chip", whay I'm saying is that even if it's a server chip it's probably going to be better (maybe not so much, but definitely better) than current AMD flagship chips in gaming, even if it will end almost surely slower than Core 2 or core Quad Extreme chips. Moreover, I see no great differences between Barcelona and Agena FX chips. What I want to say, is that the showcase IMHO could use a CPU with "Barcelona architecture", even if it's not an Opteron chip.

Its desktop equivalents are a quarter past Barcelona's release, and that release is still months after the likely launch of R600.
Barcelona is a quad-core server processor. The idea of using it to demonstrate a superior platform for gaming and for R600 is what is being debated.
I am only discussing Barcelona because that name only applies to that particular chip.

See above, I refer to Barcelona as an architecture instead of an Opteron chip. Anyway, the dual core desktop parts are surely a quarter late, but as I said before the FX line (gaming chips, accordingo to AMD) of "Barcelona-related" AMD CPUs will be 4-cores, and there is really almost no difference between a 4 core Barcelona and a 4 core Agena FX (except maybe clock speed), according to what we know: both will have coherent HTT links, and same socket: it makes no sense from a production point of view to have a different die. IMHO there are more differences between Agena and Agena FX than between Barcelona and Agena FX. I think that Barcelona and Agena FX are indeed the very same silicon, and the reason of later launch of desktop line is simply that ramping up the production will take time and hence the number of CPU produced in the first months are not compatible with the numbers required for the desktop market. It was the same with Opteron/A64 in the Clawhammer times.

I've already brought up that possibility, which is a better one than saying Barcelona is a superior gaming chip.

What I'm saying is that probably the "barcelona-like" chip being used for the showcase will be a superior gaming chip with respect to AMD's current line of CPU, not being necessarily superior to Intel's flagship chips.

3dilettante

06-Apr-2007, 23:59

But currently there are three FX speed grades (FX 70; FX 72; FX 74), so why are they going back to a single "halo" CPU again ?

Makes little sense to me, certainly even less when the only difference between an "Agena" and an "Agena FX" will likely be a step up in the speed bin and an unlocked multiplier (or so we hope), and all of them will have to be used with niche motherboards (LGA 1207 will take care of carving it, price-wise).

The last time AMD used a server/workstation socket exclusively for a server/workstation CPU and/or a top desktop part (socket 940) clearly didn't work, or else they wouldn't have devised FX processors for the socket 939. They would've just kept them in s940.

Agena FX might be meant for the Quad FX platform.

The socket it uses, AM3, also has support for DDR3, and independent power planes, so there are some benefits to the Agena FX core, though they don't look like they'll really change too much for peak performance.

jimmyjames123

06-Apr-2007, 23:59

Wow, just wow.............
Kyle_Bennett HardOCP Editor-in-Chief

R600 pricing that Boot Daily has is wrong. The R600 is going to be ATI's 5800...
Reply With Quote

I'm not sure that Kyle's statement could be true in an absolute sense. Sure, there are probably similarities that could be drawn. Both were late and came many months after the world's first DX9/DX10 cards unveiled by the competition, and had some physical aspects that were not as desireable as the competition (such as higher power consumption and/or louder fan).

However, the 5800 never did very well in the DX9 environment that it supported. On the other hand, AMD seems very confident about R600's ability in DX10, even if performance on current games may not be very superior to the competition.

One interesting thing to note is that the delayed 5800 was soon replaced by the 5900. In the last generation, the delayed X1800 was soon replaced by the X1900. This may very well happen with the delayed X2900 as well.

Jawed

07-Apr-2007, 00:02

FX7x is socket 1207 - which is why an Opteron 2xx is quite happy running in a Quad-FX mobo, and why I expect Barcelona to be demonstrated in a Quad-FX mobo.

Also, Barcelona has an L3 cache.

Jawed

Kaotik

07-Apr-2007, 00:05

However, the 5800 never did very well in the DX9 environment that it supported. On the other hand, AMD seems very confident about R600's ability in DX10, even if performance on current games may not be very superior to the competition.
On the performance, all I got to say that it's apparently a lot more impressive on geometry shaders than GF8800's are, at least that's what the Microsoft people doing the FSX SP1 said (SP1 adds the D3D10 support for it)

INKster

07-Apr-2007, 00:05

FX7x is socket 1207 - which is why an Opteron 2xx is quite happy running in a Quad-FX mobo, and why I expect Barcelona to be demonstrated in a Quad-FX mobo.

Also, Barcelona has an L3 cache.

Jawed

I think all K10 CPU's will have L3 (except low-end Sempron-like parts, probably).
It's just its amount that will vary.

3dilettante

07-Apr-2007, 00:08

1Mbyte vs 512Kbyte of cache leads to an 3-5% improvement in games on A64 at the same clock. Barcelona caches will have more bandwidth and there will be the other improvements. Core 2 was a major improvement versus Core architecture (Yonah) but Yonah was on the same league of A64 on a performance per clock basis. If we see the same Core-Core2 jump between A64 and Barcelona...

And a drop in clock speed, which there wasn't for Core2...

See above, I refer to Barcelona as an architecture instead of an Opteron chip. Anyway, the dual core desktop parts are surely a quarter late, but as I said before the FX line (gaming chips, accordingo to AMD) of "Barcelona-related" AMD CPUs will be 4-cores, and there is really almost no difference between a 4 core Barcelona and a 4 core Agena FX (except maybe clock speed), according to what we know: both will have coherent HTT links, and same socket: it makes no sense from a production point of view to have a different die. IMHO there are more differences between Agena and Agena FX than between Barcelona and Agena FX. I think that Barcelona and Agena FX are indeed the very same silicon, and the reason of later launch of desktop line is simply that ramping up the production will take time and hence the number of CPU produced in the first months are not compatible with the numbers required for the desktop market. It was the same with Opteron/A64 in the Clawhammer times.

There may be some differences because of a change in socket. Independent power planes and DDR3 are possible with AM3, though I don't know if those will show up with Agena FX first or not.
The later release may also indicate a few tweaks here and there, though overall the changes shouldn't be earth-shattering.

What I'm saying is that probably the "barcelona-like" chip being used for the showcase will be a superior gaming chip with respect to AMD's current line of CPU, not being necessarily superior to Intel's flagship chips.

Possibly, though it won't be quite the PR coup to have a new chip that almost does as well as what the competition had out for months.

Jawed

07-Apr-2007, 00:11

I think all K10 CPU's will have L3 (except low-end Sempron-like parts, probably).
It's just its amount that will vary.
Hmm, I got the distinct impression that L3 was architecturally optional, only for the wealthy.

Jawed

INKster

07-Apr-2007, 00:13

Hmm, I got the distinct impression that L3 was architecturally optional, only for the wealthy.

Jawed

Nothing has changed.
That part was (and still is) played by the L2 size in the K8's and K7's.

leoneazzurro

07-Apr-2007, 00:17

I think all K10 CPU's will have L3 (except low-end Sempron-like parts, probably).
It's just its amount that will vary.

According to dailytech it is so, but we will see. (we are still waiting for ZRAM improvements).

Anyway, Agena FX should be Socket F, not AM3 (otherwise it will not work in a Quad FX board), and seems AMD will not support DDR3 until 2008 at least.

leoneazzurro

07-Apr-2007, 00:28

And a drop in clock speed, which there wasn't for Core2...

Yonah was already Dual core, A64 are not Quad-core, hence the reduction in clock speed. Dual core parts of course will fare better in the clock department.

There may be some differences because of a change in socket. Independent power planes and DDR3 are possible with AM3, though I don't know if those will show up with Agena FX first or not.
The later release may also indicate a few tweaks here and there, though overall the changes shouldn't be earth-shattering.

Normally these changes are made after silicon production. And anyway, FX is socket F, so there will be no differences in packaging, too.

Possibly, though it won't be quite the PR coup to have a new chip that almost does as well as what the competition had out for months.

Better than demonstrate with a chip being wiped out from the competition for months , I think... :wink:

Kaotik

07-Apr-2007, 00:29

I know everyone goes offtopic every now and then, but maybe the K10 speculation could be splitted to it's own thread?

leoneazzurro

07-Apr-2007, 00:31

I know everyone goes offtopic every now and then, but maybe the K10 speculation could be splitted to it's own thread?

Sorry, I was taken by the discussion. :oops: For me, the OT is closed.

ChrisRay

07-Apr-2007, 05:42

While I agree with jimmy in principle, because some of the opinions right now are a tad exagerated (101.41 isn't that bad, imo) - I'll have to point out that my current experience with the 8800GTX in Vista massively indicates how system-dependent the problems are.

On my previous PC, the 8800GTX and Vista under 101.41 worked all fine and dandy. Switch to card to my new PC, and tadam, 3D applications crash within 10 mins and then I need a reboot to get them to work again! Rather ridiculous, to say the least. However, by disabling Aero, everything works fine again. So, excluding that single problem (which is huge, obviously), my experience in Vista with 101.41 has been positive, and even older games worked for me.

But as it is, unless NVIDIA fixes that problem with driver resets, which at least for me was system dependent and only happened with Aero, I'll have to categorize their current G8X driver efforts as "complete and utter shit". Given I've got only a single problem left now though, that could change drastically for me by the next driver release. As it is, though, I'd certainly prefer running a R600 than a G80 under Vista, bah! Would have been nice if it had been released in January for that reason alone in my case... :(

101.41's days are numbered. I am actually surprised the next revision hasnt been released next. I am expecting them very soon. A recent conversation with Nvidia gave me a look at their bug lists and bug fixes. And the new drivers due very soon are looking very promising from a bug fix perspective. I've been using Vista for the last 2 weeks now with a 8800 SLI setup. Other than a small performance deficit compared to XP I havent noticed a huge difference in ther seen a huge difference between Vista and XP other than the AERO interface..

Now Networking. Thats entirely different and Vista may make me want to kill someone. Though it's interesting that your having an AERO problems. If you PM your exact setup. I'd like to compare notes.

Chris

INKster

07-Apr-2007, 06:16

101.41's days are numbered. I am actually surprised the next revision hasnt been released next.

By the way... (http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=964101&postcount=8) ;)

ChrisRay

07-Apr-2007, 06:19

By the way... (http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=964101&postcount=8) ;)

Those arent. If I understood it correctly. The drivers I am talking about. :)

Silent_Buddha

07-Apr-2007, 06:24

8800's also currently have some massive stability issues in Vanguard (an Unreal Engine 3.0 game). Hopefully the new drivers address some of those issues.

Also, considering AMD's focus on stream computing. I'm guessing one the big customers they are targetting with the launch is Big Oil companies and the scientific community. And the news of driver polishing might be in regards to the stream computing programming interface as opposed to standard Vista drivers.

Considering margins for products in these areas are stratospheric, AMD might be banking on making a splash in this niche market.

That would certain be one case where showcasing R600 with Barcelona makes a whole lot of sense. When we're talking about a niche market that could be worth hundreds of millions to the first graphics company to break into with stream computer on a graphics card...

Also just as with Athlon 64 FX, I'd expect Agena FX to be exactly the same chip as Barcelona except with a clockspeed bump.

Also, AMD is making noise that Barcelona is faster than Intels quad core on a clock of clock basis. It would stand to reason it's probably also faster than Core 2 on a clock for clock basis. Whether that's enough to make up for a clock speed different is another matter entirely.

Which means there should be no drawbacks to showing R600 on a barcelona system as opposed to a core 2 system. And there's a potentially good upside in showing that they are at least as fast or faster than Intel's competing chips.

Also, sales for AMD chips isn't lagging. Their margins are certainly hurting but AMD is doing everything they can to maintain their market share. And that means cutting margins while waiting for their next chip.

And in possibly the more important CPU market. Opterons aren't lagging behind Intel in performance by much.

I'm still not sure they'll have a chip compelling enough to make me upgrade again this year considering I just recently upgraded to a core 2 system. Likewise, I doubt Intel will be releasing anything that would make me consider upgrading my current core 2 system. :wink:

Regards,
SB

icecold1983

07-Apr-2007, 07:59

i hope r600 does have good drivers, cuz these g80 ones are by far the worst drivers ive ever used, if not the worst ever. creatives drivers are a golden standard by comparison. not 1 single game doesnt have some type of issue.

vertex_shader

07-Apr-2007, 10:04

Don't worry guys I checked Kyle's 5800Ultra preview and then distiled his conclusions and thus have the first X2900XTX preview:

As we’ve seen, the Radeon 2900XTX is no slouch in the 3D accelerator world, however it is not the "8800-killer" many have expected. It is, at best, mildly faster in most games, and the same or slightly worse in a few. Had it arrived when most of us thought it should, there is no doubt it would be much better received.

However, its best performance was in 3dmark2007, a synthetic benchmark, and its worst in ut2008, an actual game compared to the 8800GTX. This is strangely reminiscent of the Radeon 8500 release, where the Radeon won in 3dmark, but lost in games to the GeForce 3. This anomaly, plus the strange texture problems that popped up, all point to immature drivers.

The Bottom Line: The Radeon 2900XTX is a very hot and noisy beast that may give you a bit of an edge over the current king of the hill, the nVidia 8800GTX in some applications. If you are an ATI fanboy, this of course has your name all over it. At the current US$599.00 price point, the Radeon simply does not seem worth it to us. If AMD can work some driver magic and pull an extra 20% increase in frame rate out of the bag like we have seen in the past, they had best start pulling. Either that or pull out the R650 chipset, and quick.

This year will be interesting as both ATI and NVIDIA know it is all about having the best VidCard on the market when Crysis hits.

Looks like the guy not invited to AMD techday :lol:
Same BS happend before R520 released in other site, i think everyone remember.

Btw. UT2008 not exist, tha game name still UT2k7 so i dunno wth are he writing, UT is part of NV the "The Way It's Meant To Be Paid" program, so im not shocked if true the game months before release faster with nv cards :wink:

07-Apr-2007, 10:16

Looks like the guy not invited to AMD techday :lol:
Same BS happend before R520 released in other site, i think everyone remember.

Btw. UT2008 not exist, tha game name still UT2k7 so i dunno wth are he writing, UT is part of NV the "The Way It's Meant To Be Paid" program, so im not shocked if true the game months before release faster with nv cards :wink:

Small correction. The game has had a namechange to UT3.

And my first thoughts were also that someone didn't receive an invitation to the Tech Day. :lol:

vertex_shader

07-Apr-2007, 10:21

Small correction. The game has had a namechange to UT3.

Thx, i was wrong too :oops:

IbaneZ

07-Apr-2007, 10:23

Whatever Kyle's reason is for saying that, I sure hope he doesn't know something we don't. :lol:

Ailuros

07-Apr-2007, 10:27

Btw. UT2008 not exist, tha game name still UT2k7 so i dunno wth are he writing, UT is part of NV the "The Way It's Meant To Be Paid" program, so im not shocked if true the game months before release faster with nv cards :wink:

This one poses for another correction; if above would be true I'd have to wonder why in the past the R300 trounced in almost every game that was part of the TWIMTP program any NV3x.

vertex_shader

07-Apr-2007, 10:50

This one poses for another correction; if above would be true I'd have to wonder why in the past the R300 trounced in almost every game that was part of the TWIMTP program any NV3x.

I not write its will be not faster with r600 when the game coming out, i just write im not shocked when months before release the game faster with nv cards :smile:

Ailuros

07-Apr-2007, 11:26

I not write its will be not faster with r600 when the game coming out, i just write im not shocked when months before release the game faster with nv cards :smile:

I don't recall any indication anywhere which GPU works better or worse in UT3 and yes I'd expect Epic to already have a R600 dev sample for quite some time. And yes I'd expect them to be able to scan the exact potential of each GPU. Above all that though silence is gold irrelevant of the real outcome.

Anyway let me get this str8, neliz took the old FX5800 text and changed a couple of words (which he also highlighted) and a whole plot of conspiracy theories appears? My apologies if I missed anything, but this rather sounds like a harmless joke.

vertex_shader

07-Apr-2007, 13:12

Anyway let me get this str8, neliz took the old FX5800 text and changed a couple of words (which he also highlighted) and a whole plot of conspiracy theories appears? My apologies if I missed anything, but this rather sounds like a harmless joke.

Ohh i see now what neliz write, i misunderstand something, when i read it first i think Kyle write this, but now i see it was a joke :smile:

I not really understand why anyone think r600 is AMD nv30, except delay there is no reason to think this.

Pete

07-Apr-2007, 15:55

Labeling something a 5800 is getting to be a lazy and somewhat meaningless comparison, isn't it. Unless R600's hotter, louder, and significantly slower in DX10, I do not think that word means what Kyle thinks it means </Inigo>. We're probably be closer to a repeat of R520, if anything, but I guess that isn't as dramatic a statement (and still lazy).

Edit: Zing! :smile: I forget to mention worse IQ in my haste to mock Kyle. (Why did I build this house out of glass?!)

jamis

07-Apr-2007, 16:16

Labeling something a 5800 is getting to be a lazy and somewhat meaningless comparison, isn't it. Unless R600's hotter, louder, and significantly slower in DX10, I do not think that word means what Kyle thinks it means </Inigo>.
Actually it should be hot, loud and pretty much incapable running anything DX10. :grin:
So there's no chance in hell for that. Whether it ends up bit slower or faster than G80 I have no doubt that unlike nv30 it will be a very good chip and do everything it's supposed to do just fine.

Silent_Buddha

07-Apr-2007, 17:49

I'd be really surprised if either company would release another debacle along the lines of the 5800.

One card or another will be faster or slower depending on design decisions, but it won't be a case where X card will be so horrible at running Directx Y that it requires massive game individualized shader replacements in order to run at a somewhat acceptable speed.

In fact, thank goodness, I see a trend by both companies to focus on Image Quality while balancing speed gains against that.

Personally I think the future of high end 3D accelerators isn't in how fast they are compared to the competition, but how good the Image Quality is compared to the competition while running at an acceptable speed.

Of course, "acceptable speed" is inherently subjective and while some people can't stand anything that won't benchmark at least 60+ FPS, a lot of us are also perfectly fine with games running around 20-30+ FPS depending on the type of game.

Heck, in something like EQ2 I'm perfectly fine raiding even at 12-14 FPS, and that considering I'm the MA that the entire raid's DPS goes though.

Then again, if I'm playing an FPS 25+ is a must. And if I'm competing at a LAN party, then 40+ is a must for me to comfortably rank in the top 3 consistently.

So as I see it. 5800 was a one time blemish that neither of these 2 graphics companies will probably repeat. Of course, now that I said that...it'll probably happen. :grin: :lol: :razz:

No, I expect in the future we'll continue to see increased speed as in the past, but we'll also an increased emphasis on increased IQ from both companies.

Regards,
SB

compres

08-Apr-2007, 01:03

I surprises me that someone could say something as bold, coming from a popular website like that. Seems like ethics are going down no matter where you look.

Also, seems to me like nVidia is still hoping that ATI releases a catastrophic product, just like the nv30. Its like the want to be even, since they are still not emotionally recovered from that knock out blow they had back then. It does not matter if they are on top at the moment lol.

Rangers

08-Apr-2007, 01:17

Razor1

08-Apr-2007, 02:11

I think the reason they are showing it off on barcelona is it will give it the best platform to show the r600 on, at least for editor's day, benchmark numbers will be inflated a bit. Barcelona should be a very solid platform.

Silent_Buddha

08-Apr-2007, 05:03

I agree on that point Razor but it's certainly more than that. I think this launch perhaps more than any other in the past is aimed at OEM's to show AMD's ability to launch and support an entire platform from top to bottom. And also to showcase stream computing to the extremely high margin stream computing market.

I think an entire platform will do more to boost marketshare for AMD than just another fast CPU or just another fast video card. OEM's want a competitve product from AMD as it gives them a better platform (pun intended) and position for negotiating prices with Intel. And if AMD can pull off an entire platform, they stand to gain a lot of ground among the OEMs which directly drives marketshare.

Regards,
SB

Bubonic

08-Apr-2007, 06:09

icecold1983

08-Apr-2007, 06:31

the constant delays show the exact opposite of confidence to this consumer

SugarCoat

08-Apr-2007, 07:39

8800's also currently have some massive stability issues in Vanguard (an Unreal Engine 3.0 game). Hopefully the new drivers address some of those issues.

actually its using 2.5 or what ever the hell version that old engine is at. Basically the same as UT2004 or a newer splinter cell game and im not having any stability issues with that game and my 8800. Recently some creeping and shimmering textures in certain locations but thats all i can complain about.

Russell

08-Apr-2007, 07:47

the constant delays show the exact opposite of confidence to this consumer

Keep in mind that there's technically been only one official delay.

icecold1983

08-Apr-2007, 07:53

Shtal

08-Apr-2007, 07:53

Kyle is an absurd Nvidia fanboy. I've called him out on it on his board in the past.

The last one was when he declared that R600 would require 300 watts..it's like he's actively looking for angles to bash the R600 when he writes any story about it.

I would like to ask this question to everyone? Feel Free to vote :)
http://snappoll.com/poll/184674.php

Thanks :)

neliz

08-Apr-2007, 08:56

id imagine anyone buying a 500+ video card is well aware of the many unofficial r600 delays and this "one time launch" doesnt make any of them more prone to prefer amd. delaying to launch together is probably the worst marketing idea ive ever seen.

Why are you so worried about R600's launch? you need to replace your 8800 THAT badly?

Geeforcer

08-Apr-2007, 09:39

I for one did not know that a commitment to purchasing a R600 was required in order to be able to participate in discussions regarding the launch strategy.

icecold1983

08-Apr-2007, 11:45

i love technology, so regardless of whether or not i buy an r600, i RLY want to see what it brings to the table.

Sobek

08-Apr-2007, 12:57

I for one did not know that a commitment to purchasing a R600 was required in order to be able to participate in discussions regarding the launch strategy.

It was introduced during that mass Elitist movement in the early 90's when massive ISA cards that cost more than life insurance started flooding the market. :wink:

Personally, i've waited so long now for R600 (and slapped myself countless times for even considering purchasing a G80) that I think I could actually wait...oh I don't know, 3, maybe 4 lifetimes? For it to come out. I just want my R600. Out of curiosity, once it's actually released, do you think we'll all move to properly calling it the x2900? Because I honestly think R600 sounds better, and i've been calling it that for so long i'm really used to it...

BlizzardOne

08-Apr-2007, 13:21

Out of curiosity, once it's actually released, do you think we'll all move to properly calling it the x2900? Because I honestly think R600 sounds better, and i've been calling it that for so long i'm really used to it...

I agree, R600 sounds better - I still refer to my X1950's as my R580's, cause it sounds better, and isn't as much of a mouthful. :smile:

icecold1983

08-Apr-2007, 13:31

r600 is just better to type.

WaltC

08-Apr-2007, 13:56

id imagine anyone buying a 500+ video card is well aware of the many unofficial r600 delays and this "one time launch" doesnt make any of them more prone to prefer amd. delaying to launch together is probably the worst marketing idea ive ever seen.

No, I think without a doubt the "worst marketing idea I've ever seen" award goes to nVidia for its truly awful 18-month PR period post the R300 launch and prior to nVidia shipping nV40...;) During that time we saw just how bad marketing could really be, and how low it could go. By comparison, this is nothing. (You don't see ATi proclaiming that "We don't believe that G8x represents the future of 3d gaming," do you? You don't see ATi publicly withdrawing from benchmarks, or criticizing game developers for their game demos, or any of the other shameful PR tactics nVidia uselessly employed--to its own detriment--during that period, do you?)

Also, "unofficial delays" amount only to some website somewhere either making up a story about R600's release date, or else repeating a rumor that somebody else on some other web site made up about R600's ship date, and then crying "It's late!" when the made-up dates come and go without the product shipping. I think that most of the people smart enough to accumulate enough cash to buy R600 when it ships, or a G80 for that matter, would also be smart enough enough not to pay attention to "unofficial delays" of any kind. They just don't count.

But I will regrettably stipulate that there remain a few people even today who still believe that they can accept everything they see written on an Internet web page as the Gospel truth, whether it's "official" or it isn't...;)

MulciberXP

08-Apr-2007, 15:53

No, I think without a doubt the "worst marketing idea I've ever seen" award goes to nVidia for its truly awful 18-month PR period post the R300 launch and prior to nVidia shipping nV40...;)

bwahaha, awesome :lol:

Though, I have to say Walt, THAT marketing idea probably helped nVidia the corporation and their shareholders quite a bit....just not the consumer. *shrug* for what it's worth.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 16:08

... or it makes more sense to get a new DirectX 10 graphics card now?

I have to admit I'm surprised by the poll results here (>3800 votes):

http://www.xbitlabs.com/

which currently show:

I’ll wait for R600 before making a purchase decision - 1360 (35.8%)
I’ll get a new DX10 board as soon as the price is right - 615 (16.2%)
I already own a GeForce 8800 - 434 (11.4%)
It worth to wait till the games that take advantage of DX10 emerge - 1016 (26.7%)
I am satisfied with my integrated/low-end graphics adapter - no plans for a new one - 375 (9.9%)What's surprising is a lot of people are still waiting for R600 before deciding. Will they wait another ~5 weeks or will G84/86 tempt them?...

Jawed

ShaidarHaran

08-Apr-2007, 16:24

On the performance, all I got to say that it's apparently a lot more impressive on geometry shaders than GF8800's are, at least that's what the Microsoft people doing the FSX SP1 said (SP1 adds the D3D10 support for it)

Correction: SP1 does not include DX10 support for FS10. There is a seperate DX10 patch being developed that will be released sometime after SP1 (now sadly not expected until 2008).

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 16:26

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 16:33

Jawed, keep in mind that the "waiting" statistics will be inflated by those people who would not have bought an R600 by now even if it was released earlier. And those who still won't buy one after release. Note how many people claim to be waiting for high-end hardware then end up buying nothing or a mid-range variant.
I think the poll is worded to take into account all those factors.

It is not a "who is going to buy an R600?" poll. But people might make up their mind what to do based on the next NVidia parts, because the prices will be "unignorable". (Though I admit the performance shown on Hardware Zone could be off-putting, if it turns out true.)

~21% have already decided something: 11% have bought 8800GTX and 10% won't buy anything any time soon.

Jawed

Kaotik

08-Apr-2007, 16:38

Correction: SP1 does not include DX10 support for FS10. There is a seperate DX10 patch being developed that will be released sometime after SP1 (now sadly not expected until 2008).

Link for that? The blog post said that DX10 patch is being developed in the same team as SP1, and at least I understood from something in there that they would be released at the same time?

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 16:51

I think the poll is worded to take into account all those factors.

No what I'm saying is that some of the 35% who chose "waiting for R600" are probably also waiting for more affordable hardware and DX10 games (which are two other categories). What would you have considered an unsurprising number - it seems pretty reasonable given where we are today.

ShaidarHaran

08-Apr-2007, 17:01

Link for that? The blog post said that DX10 patch is being developed in the same team as SP1, and at least I understood from something in
there that they would be released at the same time?

Phil Taylor's Blog (http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/default.aspx)
Phil Taylor is the Senior Project Manager for Graphics and Terrain w/Aces Studio, working on FSX.

In terms of DX10, we have continued to make progress albeit slow. So DX10 will be after SP1.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 17:05

No what I'm saying is that some of the 35% who chose "waiting for R600" are probably also waiting for more affordable hardware and DX10 games (which are two other categories).
But with those two choices available in the poll, why did they vote "waiting for R600"? Sure some people make a mistake or vote hastily.

What would you have considered an unsurprising number - it seems pretty reasonable given where we are today.
Less than 20% really - the population who would consider a >=$350 card, at best. With a significant likelihood that people would have bought an 8800 of some sort by now, because we've had Christmas, tax-returns and now "spring clean" Easter buying.

At the same time I guess some people who voted R600 have no intention of buying R600, but knowing that RV6xx appears at the same time will see if an RV part is tempting. So, R600 might be inflated. Which is what you're saying. But I think the "price is right" choice should have sucked most of them in. So, I suppose you could conclude it's inflated by the people who will only buy ATI.

Jawed

Kaotik

08-Apr-2007, 17:07

Phil Taylor's Blog (http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/default.aspx)
Phil Taylor is the Senior Project Manager for Graphics and Terrain w/Aces Studio, working on FSX.

Oh bugger, guess I understood wrong earlier, or then it has changed since that entry which on I was basing what I said.
Guess I should read that blog more often :cool:

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 17:17

But with those two choices available in the poll, why did they vote "waiting for R600"? Sure some people make a mistake or vote hastily.

Because it was higher in the list of choices? I actually think "waiting for R600" refers to the full spectrum of users waiting to compare AMD's hardware across all price levels.

Less than 20% really - the population who would consider a >=$350 card, at best.

Hence why I think that the waiting for R600 choice wasnt limited to those looking at high-end hardware. Given the 16% response from those waiting for lower prices I think it's fair to say that that category was severely underrepresented.

So I would lump a lot of those categories together and ascribe it to those people waiting for things to "feel right". Which to me involves Vista, drivers, AMD competition, lower prices, DX10 games - all the pieces of the puzzle.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 17:40

I think the main point of surprise I'm trying to get across is that the poll reflects people* are way more patient than the "R600 is late DAAMIT!!!" kvetching would indicate, and even that there seems to be goodwill aimed at R600 - despite it being anything from 1-6 months late (as the forum "late" nazi, I honestly can't make up my mind on that!).

Put another way, the NVidia marketing machine and "8800 is so good, buy it!" tone of reviews hasn't made R600 "irrelevant". 8800 hasn't convinced people that they can safely buy NVidia.

* = enthusiasts who read XBit.

Jawed

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 17:45

Well no matter how much the vocal minority bitches the market as a whole is either oblivious or just doesn't care as much. So you shouldn't expect some correlation in the poll. And to re-iterate my earlier point - many of the people complaining aren't going to buy high-end hardware anyway. And why are you making a connection between review conclusions and Nvidia marketing? That's a bit underhanded no? What reason would a reviewer have for compelling someone to not buy a G80 based card? It's not like they can guarantee that R600 won't have the same driver problems currently plaguing G80.

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 17:49

Not sure if this has been posted but have you guys seen this video of the 690 chipset Q&A - http://www.gearlive.com/news/article/159-amd-press-qa

Download - http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp4?http://blip.tv/file/get/Bleedingedge-BleedingEdgeTV159AMDPressConferenceQA849.mp4

From 8:15 there's talk about R600's power draw and promises of improvements in R650/R700. They also get pretty adamant about their stance that their customers want the combined launch and don't mind the delay.

Razor1

08-Apr-2007, 18:17

they kinda actually ignored the power question :oops:, well they didn't answer it directly

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 18:21

And why are you making a connection between review conclusions and Nvidia marketing?
I did? I mentioned two huge factors which, jointly and severally, dim R600's light.

Jawed

chavvdarrr

08-Apr-2007, 18:22

They also get pretty adamant about their stance that their customers want the combined launch and don't mind the delay.LOL, like they had given choice to the customers :D
"Guys, what do you want from us - to delay R600 or a combined launch so we'll be able to delay R600?"
:twisted:

chavvdarrr

08-Apr-2007, 18:23

they kinda actually ignored the power question :oops:, well they didn't answer it directlyrather they sorta answered it... indirectly :shock:

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 18:29

I did? I mentioned two huge factors which, jointly and severally, dim R600's light.

Sorry, that's how it read to me. But those things are just natural consequences of being MIA. I might be misreading you but it sounds like you're surprised by the amount of faith in R600 that lingers after all this time? I just think you're ascribing too much of consumer uncertainty to "AMD/R600 goodwill" when there are other, probably more important factors out there.

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 18:34

they kinda actually ignored the power question :oops:, well they didn't answer it directly

Well Orton did say that the tools weren't in place for R600 whatever that means. So they certainly aren't proud of their performance per watt accomplishments. Slight improvements for R650 and major improvements for R700. So whatever is causing the problem it appears to be due to architectural decisions and not necessarily process related.

Not sure what it means for absolute performance though. One could assume that if performance was abundant they could scale it back and bring power consumption back in line but it seems that R600's power consumption was necessary for it to be competitive.

Razor1

08-Apr-2007, 18:43

possibly

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 18:57

Sorry, that's how it read to me. But those things are just natural consequences of being MIA. I might be misreading you but it sounds like you're surprised by the amount of faith in R600 that lingers after all this time?
Yeah, that's my general interpretation.

I just think you're ascribing too much of consumer uncertainty to "AMD/R600 goodwill" when there are other, probably more important factors out there.
It isn't the biggest factor - but I guess I thought the marketplace treats the tardiness more harshly.

Then again, Vista itself has caused all sorts of surprises - sentiment has been all over the place, as has sales.

Jawed

Geo

08-Apr-2007, 19:10

I might be misreading you but it sounds like you're surprised by the amount of faith in R600 that lingers after all this time?

Some of us still remember that back when 9700 Pro was blowing everyone's mind that Dave Orton smirked something like "That ain't nothing --R400 is the one that has me excited". And if you step thru the roadmap gyrations, R600 (improved by the delay, no doubt) is that part. . . So talk about delayed! :lol: Tho, to be fair, much of that delay needs to be laid at the feet of Microsoft. Don't forget Vista was supposed to be 2003.

The question really is, has the reality of 4.5 years sucked most of the ZOMG out of it. I suspect the answer is yes, actually, but that doesn't mean it can't be a quite competent and competitive part.

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 19:20

Hmmm I wonder what is closest to his idea of "R400". Is it Xenos? Is R600 just Xenos on steroids? Jawed's analysis of some of the recent patents seems to say no. And of course there's always the X factor of what the competition is doing. It's hard to predict the state of things so far in the future. It's a long road from a twinkle in the eye to silicon on the shelf.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 19:48

Well Orton did say that the tools weren't in place for R600 whatever that means.
Death of X-architecture and/or death of Fast14?

So they certainly aren't proud of their performance per watt accomplishments. Slight improvements for R650 and major improvements for R700. So whatever is causing the problem it appears to be due to architectural decisions and not necessarily process related.
In theory the 200W, for 512GFLOPs of each R600 is basically ALUs while the TMUs/ROPs/memory are running "practically idle". Obviously the rest of the die (beyond ALUs) must be consuming power, but we have no idea :sad: In:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=37616

the implication is that R580 spends ~25% of the die on ALUs/register-file (problematic, to be honest). The scaling of "die area" from R580 to R600 is ~50% (size + 90->80nm transition), while MADs go from 192 per clock to 320, 67%. The implication is that the ALUs/register-file in R600 constitute a larger proportion of the die than in R580. And that excludes architectural features surrounding the ALUs that improve per-clock utilisation.

I can't remember the power draw of R580 when it's folding at 3D clocks :oops:

So, erm, where does that leave us?

Still, the impression this video provides (a video is worth a million words?) is that R600 is consuming a heck of a lot of power and I can't help thinking that XT will squeeze in below 225W while XTX will be late, hot, rare and awkward. I even get the feeling that they'll rush the 65nm version because XTX is just too marginal for consumer acceptance, consuming well in excess of 225W.

Not sure what it means for absolute performance though. One could assume that if performance was abundant they could scale it back and bring power consumption back in line but it seems that R600's power consumption was necessary for it to be competitive.
ATI didn't scale-back X1800XT for the sake of power/temps/noise, nor X1900XTX, despite the fact both had a comfortable performance advantage.

I think basically they'll launch XT and XTX and be damned, but they're on a warning. The summer's going to be hot.

Jawed

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 19:51

Hmmm I wonder what is closest to his idea of "R400". Is it Xenos? Is R600 just Xenos on steroids?
If it is, I'll cry :cry:

Jawed

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 19:52

ATI didn't scale-back X1800XT for the sake of power/temps/noise, nor X1900XTX, despite the fact both had a comfortable performance advantage.

Yep true, but in absolute terms were they that bad? Of course they paled next to the tiny G71 but that's relative. It sounds like the concern here is that it'll be pretty bad even without competition to compare against.

In theory the 200W, for 512GFLOPs of each R600 is basically ALUs while the TMUs/ROPs/memory are running "practically idle". Obviously the rest of the die (beyond ALUs) must be consuming power, but we have no idea

Hmmm good point. I wonder if G80's hand tuned shaders and doubled-filtering will prove to be big power saving advantages.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 20:01

It sounds like the concern here is that it'll be pretty bad even without competition to compare against.
Agreed. That video shows they're concerned...

All I'm saying is that AMD will launch it regardless - there's a badge of honour amongst true enthusiasts, 11 on the dial as it were. Someone will buy it. Maybe they'll have to sell it in a briefcase as a limited edition, though :razz:

It's nice to hear that R650 is next, anyway (not R680).

Jawed

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 20:18

Hmmm good point. I wonder if G80's hand tuned shaders and doubled-filtering will prove to be big power saving advantages.
The ALUs/registers are custom, but I think the concensus is that the rest of G80 is non-custom.

I'm not convinced the 1:2 TA/TF architecture is the advantage it appears, though. SM4 increases the demand for unfiltered texels over SM2/3 code and introduces 32-bit HDR-focussed texture/render-targets to avoid the ills of working with FP16 (64-bit) textures/render-targets (which the 1:2 TA/TF architecture also focusses on). 1-clock FP16s and trilinear both ignore the fact that the bandwidth isn't there...

The second set of TFs will be spending a lot of time idle. OK, I guess that means they don't consume much power :lol:

Jawed

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 20:36

It's nice to hear that R650 is next, anyway (not R680)

Yeah it'll be interesting to see when that makes an appearance. And also what they do with R700 that improves perf/watt.

The ALUs/registers are custom, but I think the concensus is that the rest of G80 is non-custom.

I was thinking about it along the lines of lower core clocks. If R600 is a shading beast it will need those texels coming fast and furious regardless of how good it is at hiding latency. And to do that they may need to clock everything to the wazoo if they didn't go as wide with the filtering.

Unknown Soldier

08-Apr-2007, 20:44

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 21:00

I was thinking about it along the lines of lower core clocks. If R600 is a shading beast it will need those texels coming fast and furious regardless of how good it is at hiding latency. And to do that they may need to clock everything to the wazoo if they didn't go as wide with the filtering.
Say it has 32 TMUs, running at 800MHz (800x320 MADs = 512GFLOPs). Compare that to X1950XTX CrossFire in a texturing-heavy game: 32 TMUs at 650MHz with 128GB/s of bandwidth. Easy.

800MHz x 32 TMUs would mean that bilinear and point-sampled texels are 40% faster than 8800GTX.

Obviously if R600 is only 16 TMUs, then the bets are off. They'd have to be a new breed of super-TMUs. I've seen some nice texturing related patent documents (cache organisation - and I'm not convinced they don't apply to R5xx) but nothing about filtering, per se.

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 21:02

For interest sake ... do we know which(ATI?) team designed the R600 .. and which team designed the R650(?).

I know there were issues with the one team in the past ... so I think maybe this team ran into problems(again) and the second team had to come in and help out and put the R650 onto 65nm(if this is true).

Of course this is all speculation ... but it would be interesting to know which team built which product.

US

Dave Orton answered that question for you in an interview here on B3D:

If you dissect in, for example, to the R600 product, with is our next, next generation, that development team is all three sites - Orlando, Silicon Valley, Marlborough – but the architectural centre team is in the Valley, as you point out, but all three are part of that organisation.
....

So the R600 family will mainly be centred primarily in the Valley and Orlando with a little bit from Marlborough, and then the R800 would be more unified.

Source: http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/8/3

Geeforcer

08-Apr-2007, 21:05

While we don't know anything about the performance, I think there are some indications that, to paraphrase someone, R600 might be ATI's...eerr R520, as some already have noted. As in "late, with a couple of quirks to be worked out and thus slated for quick replacement with second literation of the architecture" And before someone asks me, no I don't think R520 had quirks per se, other then having too few ALUs for ATI's liking at the point of release.

Which brings to the second question: What/when do we expect in regard to R650? (Is it too early to start that R&S thread? :)) I think 65nm is to expected, provided RV6x0 production goes smoothly. If that's the case would it make R600 the one and only high-end ATI chip to be made at 80nm?

turtle

08-Apr-2007, 21:06

That was an incredibly interesting Q&A session...

R600 is 200W...or more...or less...says Orton. The group did seem rather disconcerting about power consumption.

There is R650, and I agree with Jawed it sounds like it's coming sooner rather than later judging by the reaction from Orton. R600 does have 320 MADDs. CTM seems like it's actually going somewhere this year...Might we actually see some sweet new APIs for the desktop in H2?

Barcelona is double-digit faster than C2D according to Henri, yet that statement makes Orton gulp his water and stay quiet. Mario seems clueless.

I like Henri Richard. He seems like a honest chap whom actually cares about the reality of the situation from all viewpoints, and watching him almost lose it concerning the "R600 delay" was entertaining...although now it looks like he's the one whom's head everyone is after.

What/when do we expect in regard to R650? (Is it too early to start that R&S thread? ) I think 65nm is to expected, provided RV6x0 production goes smoothly. If that's the case would it make R600 the one and only high-end ATI chip to be made at 80nm?

I think it'll be just a die shrink with perhaps higher clocks and faster GDDR4. Orton says 65nm is going swimmingly, and that to me says to expect a 65nm R650 sooner rather than later. Concerning 80nm, I still think considering the timeframe when RV570 was SUPPOSED to be released, it was a high-end part on 80nm. Were you really expecting anything else on 80nm? It seems like it's time was for products destined for Q4/Q1-ish, it makes sense to me anything planned for release after that point has always been planned for 65nm. Granted, R600 and a possible 80nm G80 are variables that's release could have earlier than they eventually will be released, if at all.

Shtal

08-Apr-2007, 21:06

I'm very impressed with the results, and its been only one day!!
Thanks guys :)

Total votes are 55

Your Primary Choice
Are you ATI or Nvidia Fan boy?

ATI/AMD 44% 24

Neither 27% 15

Both 22% 12

Nvidia 7% 4

http://snappoll.com/poll/184674.php

Thanks again! :)

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 21:15

Lol, Shtal did you post that link anywhere else besides B3D? I find the ratio of AMD:Nvidia fanboys very hard to believe :lol:

trinibwoy

08-Apr-2007, 21:20

800MHz x 32 TMUs would mean that bilinear and point-sampled texels are 40% faster than 8800GTX.

Yep, but is trilinear and aniso usage prevalent enough to make that advantage irrelevant?

Kaotik

08-Apr-2007, 21:24

But if the drivers supported X2900, shouldn't it be in the .inf's?

edit:
Possibly related, at realtek's site:
http://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=24&PFid=24&Level=4&Conn=3&DownTypeID=3&GetDown=false#High%20Definition%20Audio%20Codecs
"ATI HDMI Audio Device"
Most likely this is related to motherboards though, as at least I understood it so the audio on the R6xx's would be part of the gfx chip, not separate chip (so it couldn't really be realtek's, then?)

Straight from horses mouth, so to say, aka from AMD/ATI employee, the driver is meant for newly released AMD 690G chipset based mobos, and some RS600 mobos like abit's (http://www2.abit.com.tw/page/en/motherboard/motherboard_detail.php?pMODEL_NAME=Fatal1ty+F-I90HD&fMTYPE=LGA775)

Jawed

08-Apr-2007, 22:17

Yep, but is trilinear and aniso usage prevalent enough to make that advantage irrelevant?
Well, on the numbers I've been quoting, G80 is 44% faster than R600 for trilinear/AF/FP16...

FP16 is used in DX9 games as a HDR texture target, which is then post-processed. That would be say 5-10% of the game's entire texturing workload (guess!).

Trilinear and AF is only applied to selected textures on surfaces in games, simply because in either multitexturing, or with textures for lighting, the precision that more advanced filtering provides is not always a gain (you just can't see the difference). It very much depends on the type of blending/lighting. D3 engine applies this approach, selecting only one or two textures to receive >bilinear filtering.

I'm hoping that knowledegable shader programming people will pitch in on this subject, to help quantify it.

Jawed

Shtal

08-Apr-2007, 22:29

Lol, Shtal did you post that link anywhere else besides B3D? I find the ratio of AMD:Nvidia fanboys very hard to believe :lol:

Negative.... I did not! :lol: Honest truth

[Edit: "Quick update" And now of this minute their are total 71 votes.
http://snappoll.com/poll/184674.php And now I get basic idea why people talk about R600 :) Thanks to everyone for your votes!!!!]

Unknown Soldier

09-Apr-2007, 11:27

Dave Orton answered that question for you in an interview here on B3D:

[/I]
Source: http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/8/3

Ah, thx CJ :) I knew I had seen it somewhere on B3D, but couldn't find the article.

US

overclocked_enthusiasm

09-Apr-2007, 20:28

Can somebody tell me the big difference between the "Agena FX" and the Barcelona server part? Is the Agena FX the desktop variant? Does this "news" change anyone's opinion of the holy trinity launch concept I have been floating with RD790, Agena FX and R600? Can we expect this Agena FX to beat the Core2Duo Extreme part just released?

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=456&Itemid=1

"Exclusive: At Tunisia under NDA

Barcelona is server part while Agena FX is a FX super fast gaming part. They are both based on what AMD claims is "evolutionary design" and it calls it K10. AMD will introduce and show this CPU at Tunisia on the 23rd and 24th of April. We already told you a lot about this here.

It is the first native Quad core each having 512KB of cache memory and 2MB of shared L3 cache. It supports Hypertransport 3, enhanced PowerNow marchitecture, AMD Virtualisation. The company also claims that it is a performance leader per watt.

AMD will also showcase the RD790 chipset that supports eight cores with Quad FX system, Crossfire and some other neat features. "

Unknown Soldier

09-Apr-2007, 20:53

Interesting to note this found on HardSpell:

It starts with the admission that the R600 had been ready for some time now. In fact, the earlier news reports were accurate - ATI could have been ready for a massive CeBIT launch, but that launch was axed by AMD.

Source: HardSpell (http://www.hardspell.com/english/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=276)

Also, it seems like the Cat7.3 causes a BSOD. (Catalyst 7.3 Causes BSOD in Vista)

US

Kaotik

09-Apr-2007, 20:59

The Cat 7.3 BSODing under Vista doesn't apparently happen for all, and for most people, it can be fixed by entering safe mode and disabling "ATI External Event Utility" service (confirmed by Terry Makedon)

Geo

09-Apr-2007, 21:16

wtf is Cat 7.3 doing in here? (and there's a hotfix). Take it to the 3D Hardware/Software forum if you want to talk about that.

3dilettante

09-Apr-2007, 21:37

Can somebody tell me the big difference between the "Agena FX" and the Barcelona server part? Is the Agena FX the desktop variant? Does this "news" change anyone's opinion of the holy trinity launch concept I have been floating with RD790, Agena FX and R600?

Agena FX is the 4x4 enthusiast variant. It's something the tables I've seen is supposed to go in socket AM3, which would allow DDR3 and a few other changes like independent power planes.
The stuff floating around on the net has it scheduled for a launch in Q3 in 2007.
The Barcelona core it is based on is set to release after the Tunisa event.

Actually, if one of the later interviews is to be believed, it is set for the second half of 2007 instead of late first half.

It looks like Tunisa would be months too early to be a launch event for Agena.

Can we expect this Agena FX to beat the Core2Duo Extreme part just released?
I'm going to answer that with what you included later:

The company also claims that it is a performance leader per watt.

They wouldn't have left it at per-watt unless it's the only measure they can go by.
If they had the lead, they'd say it was the performance leader.
I'm not saying it's not possible that AMD is being cautious, but it's not a good sign.

Sound_Card

09-Apr-2007, 21:42

Nvidia is already prepared to fight R600.
http://www.dailytech.com/DailyTech+Digest+GeForce+8800+Ultra/article6826.htm

G80GX2 for 999.99

Razor1

09-Apr-2007, 21:43

that wouldn't be a fight that would be a killing but Dailytech's info doesn't really fit well, this was posted in the beyond g80 thread.

icecold1983

09-Apr-2007, 21:46

i rly hope nvidia has another answer besides a gx2.

Sound_Card

09-Apr-2007, 21:57

that wouldn't be a fight that would be a killing but Dailytech's info doesn't really fit well, this was posted in the beyond g80 thread.

Was I soppose to look in that thread to see if this was posted?

I would not call it a killing considering we have yet to see R600 in action and the last time Nvidia did this, their was driver problems galore. Multiply that x2 with quad sli. They may(more than likely), win against R600 in performace. But more than likely as well will lose in Power, price and stability. I would not call it a killing considering you will be paying twice as much for a all in one sli system over a single card.

Razor1

09-Apr-2007, 22:02

well did I say you have to read everything? I just said it was posted in another thread and the information dailytech provided doesn't seem to be all correct given that some people here already chimmed in on that.

the x2 g80 type card isn't going up against the r600.

Kaotik

09-Apr-2007, 22:42

Was this posted already?
http://www.gearlive.com/news/article/159-amd-press-qa

AMD Press conference Q&A as a video
I haven't watched the whole thing yet, but this part sounds promising:
- How many watts ... for that teraflop
- John(?) we can get back to you on that, I mean in general you're going to think about each GPU card is probably close to 200 [watts]

Geo

09-Apr-2007, 22:46

Ah ha. And there's part of the derivation of the "65nm legend" too. :smile:

When is the R600 going to hit retail, and what happened?

Moving to 65 nm chips, scheduling was just a bit off. Rather than going with a limited deployment with a single point launch, they chose to delay by a couple of weeks to have a full line launch. It isn’t a silicon problem, it was an internal decision made to allow for a full launch. They will still be available in the first half of 2007.

Frank

09-Apr-2007, 23:14

So, let's try a different comparison: IF the R600 is much more powerful, but needs new games to reap the rewards, would it be like the PS3? With the 8800 being the 360? And what chip would be the Wii?

Then again, does that actually matter one bit? Considering that ~90% of the people buy value cards, with the 6600/7600 being the best bargain, and the 1950 being the profit king at the moment? Where is the need for ATi/AMD to severely beat the 8800 for marketing purposes?

Let's not forget, that the people who post here are enthausiasts. They want the very best. But most actually buy the affordable one. Like everyone else.

Sure, we're more knowledgeable. Most of us know more about the superficial specs and benchmarks. And a few actually know the ins and outs.

Does that matter all that much? Websites recommend buying 8800s, but warn for all the problems you're likely to encounter. And if you want value for money and stability, look at the 6/7600 or 1950, depending on your budget.

Techies buy the 8800 and gleefully tackle all the problems. While most other people coming here or consulting other sources do the sensible thing and buy a 1950. And most everyone else buys a 6/7600.

It's not even as if most consumers actually check the tech sites before going to the shop to buy one. They simply ask the sales person. Who will enquire them to their budget, and recommend the card that makes him or her the most money, while still feeling safe that that won't cause negative feedback.

AMD wants and needs a serious tech and media event. Not because of their sales in the short term, but to make the top recommenders feel good about them. Because, the sales people do listen to their tech friends, who read those interviews and benchmarks. It trickles down.

Good products for a good price, that offer a good profit margin. And making a good reputation takes a long time, but breaking it can happen in an instant.

Then again (looking at nVidia with their FX), it might fuel them into making something really worthy. And continuing doing so, with a vengeance.

So, everyone who expects the R600 to be spectacular will get a cold shower. And everyone who asks: "WHY would AMD decide to postpone the launch, unless they have cooked up something bad? It won't make a difference with us enthausiasts! And they could have sold more in the mean time! And it's extremely important to have the performace crown!!!", might consider thinking it over. Because most consumers aren't like us.

;)

nomedo

10-Apr-2007, 00:28

Then again (looking at nVidia with their FX), it might fuel them into making something really worthy. And continuing doing so, with a vengeance.

but isnt that exactly what R600 is supposed to be, after the late-and-not-that-good R520 launch....? :roll:

Frank

10-Apr-2007, 00:44

but isnt that exactly what R600 is supposed to be, after the late-and-not-that-good R520 launch....? :roll:
No. Strangely enough, it's about the opposite.

If you looked at the ATi roadmap around when they had the R300, you saw the R400, which they heralded as the next revolution in GPUs. And you would also have seen the R500, which would determine the future of CGI in a very definite way.

Alas, the R400 was considered to be too advanced, too soon and too expensive to manufacture, and was replaced by the R420, a modified R300. And the R500 was decided to be unpractical for PC use, as it was too different, and so scaled down and sold to Microsoft as the GPU for the 360.

Which left their roadmap in shambles. And that is probably a serious understatement.

While nVidia had no such qualms. They wanted the best, NOW, and who cares what it cost? "Just DO it!"